# REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR THE FINAL PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORIATION AND TITLE V GREENHOUSE GAS TAILORING RULE Final Report May 2010 Linda M. Chappell, PhD U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and S tandards Air Benefits and Cost Group 109 TW Alexander Drive Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 RTI International 3040 Cornwallis Road Research Triangle Park, NC 27709

### EPA 452/R

- 10
- 003 May 2010

Regulatory

Impact Analysis for the Final Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule

Final Report

Linda M. Chappell, PhD U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality

Planning and Standards Air Benefits and Cost Group 109 TW Alexander Drive Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality

Planning and Standards Health and Environmental Impacts Division Research Triangle Park, NC

### 1 CONTENTS Page 1 Executive Summary

................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 4 1.0 Summary
................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 5 1.1 Summary

of Anal ytical Approach for the Anal ys is

................................ ......................... 9 1.2 Benefits, Cost, and Net Benefits of the Final Tailoring Rule

................................ ........ 16 1.3 Organization of this Report

................................ ................................ ............................ 20 2 Basel ine Description, Regulatory Alternatives, and Affected Entities

................................ ... 22 3 Benefits (Regulatory

Relief or Avoided Permit Burden Costs)

................................ .............. 34 3.1 Avoided Burden Costs for Title V

................................ ................................ ................. 34 3.2 Avoided Information Collection Costs Associated with the PSD Program

.................. 38 4 Social Costs
................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 45 5 Net Benefits

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 49 6 Impacts of Regulatory Relief

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 53 6. 1 Method for Anal yz ing Avoided Economic and Small Entity Impacts
.......................... 53 6.1.1 Id entifying Affected Sectors and Entities

................................ ........................... 53 6.1.2 Dat a Used to Characterize Affected Entities b y Size

................................ .......... 54 6.2 Developing Economic and Small Entity Regulatory

Relief Impact Measures
.............. 68 6.3 Implementing the Sales Test to Measure Impacts on Industrial, Commercial, and Multifamily

Residential Sources

................................ ................................ ................... 68 6.4 Economic Relief to Permitting Authorities

................................ ................................ .... 70 7 Statutory

and Executive Order Reviews

................................ ................................ ................. 87 7.1 Executive Order 12866

- Regulatory Planning and Review

................................ .......... 87 7.2 Paperwork Reduction Act

................................ ................................ .............................. 87 7.3 Regulatory

Flexibility

Act
................................ ................................ ............................. 88 7.4 Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

................................ ................................ ................... 89 7.5 Executive Order 13132

– Federalism

................................ ................................ ............ 89 7.6 Executive Order 13175

- Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments
................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 90 7.7 Executive Order 13045

- Protection of Children from Environmental Health and Safety Risks

................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 90 7.8 Executive Order 13211

- Actions That Significantly Affect Energy

Suppl y, Distribution, or Use

................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 91

### 2

7.9 National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

................................ .................. 91 7.10 Executive Order 12898

– Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low - Income Populations

................................ ..................... 91 7.11 Congressional Review Act

................................ ................................ ............................. 92 8 Limitations and Uncertainties

................................ ................................ ................................ . 93 9 References

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 99 Attachment A: Source Categories Affected by the Rule with Industry

Detail Attachment B: Technical Support Document for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Thresholds

Evaluation Attachment C: Summary of Methodology

and Data Used to Estimate Burden Relief and Evaluate Resource Requirements at Alternative Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Permitting Thresho lds

### 3 L ist of Tables Page 1.0 Time Periods and Regulatory Alternatives Anal yz ed in the RIA

................................ ..... 12 1.1 Annual Net Benefits for GHG Tailoring Rule Regulatory Alternatives

........................... 18 1.2 Net Benefits for the Final Rule and Regulatory Alternatives for Steps 1 and 2 of the Phase

- In Period

................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 19 1.3 Net Benefits of the Final Rule and Step 3 Regulatory Alternatives

................................ . 20 2.0 Phase

- In Steps for Large Sources for the Final GHG Tailoring Rule

.............................. 22 2.1 Baseline Sources Subject to Statutory Permit Requirements

................................ ........... 29 2.2 Qualitative Description of Benefits and Cost of the Tailoring Rule

................................ . 31 2.3 Estimated Number of Affected Sources Experiencing Regulatory Relief for Final Rule and Regulatory

Alternatives

................................ ................................ ..................... 32 3.0 Annual Title V Regulatory Relief (Avoided Cost) Estimates for Affected Sources of GHG and Permitting Authorities at Alternative Thresholds

................................ ........ 36 3
- 1 Steps 1 and 2 Title V Regulatory Relief (Avoided Cost) Estimates for Affected Sources of GHG and Permitting Authorities at Alternative Thresholds

........................... 39 3.2 Annual PSD Regulatory Relief (Avoided Costs) for Sources of GHG and Permitting Authorities at Alternative Thresholds

................................ ............................. 40 3.3 Step 1 and 2 PSD Regulatory Relief (Avoided Costs) for Sources of GHG and Permitting Authorities at Alternative Thresholds

................................ ............................. 43 3.4 Benefits of the Final Rule and Step 3 Regulatory Alternatives

................................ ........ 44 5.1 Annual Net Benefits for GHG Tailoring Rule Regulatory Alternatives

........................... 50 5.2 Net Benefits of the Final GHG Tailoring Rule and Regulatory Alternatives

................... 51 5.3 Net Benefits of the Final Rule and Step 3 Regulatory Alternatives

................................ . 52 6.0 Number of Firms by Industry and Enterprise Size: 2002

................................ ................. 55 6.1 Number of Establishments by Affected Industry

and Enterprise Size: 2002
.................. 57 6.2 Number of Emplo yees by Affected Industry and Enterprise Size: 2002

......................... 59 6.3 Receipts by

Industry and Enterprise Size: 2002 (in millions of 2007$)

.......................... 61 6.4 Number of Firms by Affected Industry

and Enterprise Size in Commercial Sectors: 2002
................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 63 6. 5 Number of Establishments by Affected Industry

and Enterprise Size: 2002

.................. 64 6.6 Number of Emplo yees by Affected Industry and Commercial Enterprise Size: 2002
................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 66 6.7 Receipts by

Affected Industry

and Enterprise Size: 2002 (Millions of 2007 $)

.............. 67 6.8 Avoided Title V Costs to Sales for Small Industrial Sources of GHG Emissions

........... 72 6.9 Avoided Costs to Sales for Small Modifying Industrial GHG PSD Emission Sources
................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 74 6.10 Avoided Costs to Sales f or Small New PSD Industrial GHG Sources

............................. 76 6
- 11 Avoided Title V Permitting Costs to Sales for Permit Revisions Due to GHG

............... 78 6.1 2 Title V Avoided Costs for Small New Commercial Sources of GHG Emissions Compared to Annual Sales Revenue

................................ ................................ ................. 81 6.13 Avoided Costs for Small Modifying Commercial PSD GHG Emission Sources Compare d to Annual Sales Revenue

................................ ................................ ................. 83 6.14 Avoided Costs to Small PSD New Commercial GHG Emission Sources

........................ 85

### 4

A
- 1 Title V Sources Expected to Experience Regulatory Relief at Alternative Threshold Levels b y Industry

Category
................................ ................................ ........................... 100 A
- 2 New PSD Sources Expected to Experience Regulatory Relief at Alternative Threshold Levels b y Industry Category
................................ ................................ .......... 10 2 List of Figures Page 1.0. Alternative States of Regulation Relating to the GHG Tailoring Rule

............................ 11

### 5 S ection 1 Executive Summary 1.0 Summary This Regulatory

Impact Analysis (RIA) examines the benefits, costs, and economic impacts of the F inal Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule for affected entities and society as a whole. Th e tailoring rule lifts, for a period of beginning January

2, 2011 through April 30, 2016 (referred to as phase

- in period) , the burden to obtain a title V operating permit required b y the Clean Air Act ( CAA or Act) for many small existing sources of greenhouse gas ( GHG) and the burden of P revention of S ignificant D eterioration (PSD) requirements for small new or modifying sources of GHG . Thus , this rule may be viewed as providing regulatory relief rather than regulatory requirements for these smal ler GHG sources for a period of at least the phase

- in period . For larger sources of GHG , there are no direct economic burdens or costs as a re sult of this rule, because requirements to obtain a title V operating permit or to adhere to PSD requirements of the CAA are already mandated b y the Act and by existing rules and are not imposed as a result of this rulemaking. In this final rule, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is relieving overwhelming permitting burdens that would, in the absence of thi s rule, fall on permitting authorities and sources. We accomplish this by tailoring the applicability criteria that determine which GHG emission sources become subject to the PSD and title V programs of the CAA. In particular, EPA is establishing with this rulemaking a phase

- in approach for PSD and title V applicability , and is establishing the first two steps of the phase

- in for the large emitters of GHGs. We also commit to certain follow

- up actions regarding future steps beyond the first two, discussed in more detail later

. For the first step of this Tailoring Rule, which will begin on January 2, 2011, PSD or title V requirements will apply to sources’ GHG emissions only if the sources are subject to PSD or title V any

way due to their non

- GHG convention al pollutants. Therefore, EPA will not require sources or modifications to evaluate whether they are subject to PSD or title V requirements solely on account of their GHG emissions. Specifically , for PSD, Step 1 requires that as of January 2, 2011, the a

pplicable requirements of PSD, most notably, the best available control technology

(BACT) requirement, will apply to projects that increase net GHG emissions by at least 75,000 tons per year (t py) carbon dioxide equivalent (CO 2 

### e), but only if the project also

### 6

significantl y increases emissions of at least one non

- GHG pollutant. For the title V program, only existing sources with, or new sources obtaining, title V permits for non

- GHG pollutants will be required to address GHGs during this first step. This f irst step of the tailoring rule is referred to as Step 1 or ‘anyw ay ’ threshold throughout this RIA. The second step of the t ailoring r ule, that begin s on July

1, 2011, will phase

- in additional large sources of GHG emissions. New sources as well as existing sources not already subject to title V that emit, or have the potential to emit, at least 100,000 tpy CO 2 

### e will become subject to the PSD and title V requirements. In addition, sources that emit or have the potential to emit at least 100,000 tpy

CO 2 

### e an d that undertake a modification that increases net emissions of GHGs by at least 75,000 tpy

CO 2 

### e will also be subject to PSD requirements. For both steps, we also note that if sources or modifications exceed these CO 2 

### e - adjusted GHG triggers, they are not covered b y permitting requirements unless their GHG emissions also exceed the corresponding mass -based triggers (i.e., unadjusted for CO 2 

### e.) This second step of the phase

- in period is referred to as Step 2 or 100,000 tpy CO 2 

### e threshold throughout this rep ort. Although the thresholds established by the tailoring rule are levels set that apply to sources at or above the threshold , this RIA examine the sources obtaining regulatory relief. By

definition the sources obtaining regulatory

relief are those sourc es with GHG potential to emit emissions below a particular threshold EPA believes that the costs to the sources and the administrative burdens to the permitting authorities of PSD and title V permitting will be manageable at the levels in these initial two steps, and that it would be administratively infeasible to subject additional sources to PSD and title V requirements at those times. However, we also intend to issue a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPR) in 2011, in which we will propose o r solicit comment on a third step of the phase

- in that would include more sources, beginning b y July 1, 2013. In the same rulemaking, we may propose or solicit comment on a permanent exclusion from permitting for some category

of sources

. We are establishing an enforceable commitment that we will complete this rulemaking by July 1, 2012, which will allow for 1 year's notice before step 3 would take effect. In addition, we commit to explore streamlining techniques that may well make the permitting programs much more efficient to administer for GHGs, and that therefore may allow their expansion to smaller sources. We expect that the initial streamlining techniques will take several years to develop and implement.

### 7

We are also including in this action a rul e that no source with emissions below 50,000 tpy CO 2 

### e, and no modification resulting in net GHG increases of less than 50,000 tpy CO 2 

### e, will be subject to PSD or title V permitting before at least, April 30, 2016 . This is because we are able to conclude at the present time that the administrative burdens that would accompany permitting sources below this level will be so great that even the streamlining actions that EPA may be able to develop and implement in the next several years, and even with the incre ases in permitting resources that we can reasonably expect the permitting authorities to acquire, it will be impossible to administer the permit programs for these sources until at least 2016. Further, we are establishing an enforceable commitment that we will (i) complete a study by April 30, 2015, to evaluate the status of PSD and title V permitting for GHG

- emitting sources, including progress in developing streamlining techniques; and (ii) complete further rulemaking based on that study by April 30, 201 6 , to address the permitting of smaller sources. That rulemaking may

also consider additional permanent exclusions based on the “absurd results” doctrine, where applicable. This tailoring rulemaking is necessary because without it, PSD and title V would apply to all stationary

sources that emit or have the potential to emit more than 100 or 250 t py of GHGs beginning on January

2, 2011. This is the date when EPA’s recentl y promulgated Light Duty Vehicle Rule (LDVR) 1 

### takes effect, imposing control requirements for the first time on carbon dioxide (CO 2 

### ) and other GHGs. If this January 2, 2011 date were to pass without this tailoring rule being in effect, PSD and title V requirements would apply at the 100/250 tpy CO 2 

### e potential to emit (PTE) applicability levels provided under a literal reading of the CAA as of that date. From that point forward, a source owner proposing to construct any new major source that emits at or higher than the applicability levels (and which therefore may be referred to as a “ma

jor” source) or modify

any existing major source in a way that would increase GHG emissions would need to obtain a permit under the PSD program that addresses these emissions before construction or modification could begin. Similarly, title V would appl y to a new or existing source exceeding the 100 tpy applicability

level in the Act, if the source did not already have a title V permit.

1 EPA

–HQ

–OAR

–2009

–0472; NHTSA
- 20 10
- 0059 RIN 2060
- AP58; RIN 2127
- AK50 . April 1, 20 10 Light

- Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards; Final Rule http://www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/regulations/ldv

- ghg

- final

- rule.pdf

### 8

Under these circumstances, many small sources would be burdened by the costs of the individualized PSD control technolo gy requirements and permit applications that the PSD provisions, absent streamlining, require. Additionally , state and local permitting authorities would be burdened b y the extraordinary number of these permit applications, which are orders of magnitude greater than the current inventory of permits and would vastly exceed the current administrative resources of the permitting authorities. Permit gridlock would result with the permitting authorities able to issue only a tiny fraction of the permits request ed. This rulemaking provides permitting thresholds for sources of GHG exceeding levels contained in the CAA , and these levels are phased in steps based on legal considerations of absurd results and administrative necessity discussed in the preamble to this rule. In the phase

- in period following promulgation of this rule, we estimate that , compared to baseline estimates that do not include the effects of this rule, over six million sources of GHG emissions will be allowed to operate without a title V operating permit and tens of thousands of new sources or modifying sources per year will not be subject to PSD requirements for GHG
. The emissions from these sources amount to approximately 11 percent of all GHG emissions from stationary sources (100,000 CO 2 

### e tpy threshold) equating to approximately 630 million short tons CO 2 

### e , but represent 95 percent of the total number of stationary sources . For this large number of smaller GHG sources, this rule alleviates the regulatory burden associated with obtaining an operating or PSD permit or complying with PSD BACT requirements. Therefore, this final action may be considered beneficial to these small sources as it provides relief from regulation that would otherwise be required

. Within this RIA we are providing an illustrative monetary estimate of statutory permitting requirements to show the magnitude of the savings that hypothetically result from this rulemaking. While we believe it is impossible to implement these permit requirements b y January 2, 2011 for the reasons laid out in the preamble, it is useful to understand the scale of what the burden may

have been. For sake of simplicity , within this document we refer to this illustrative monetary

estimate as the monetized benefits of the regulatory relief presented b y this rulemaking or regulatory relief benefits for brevity. We estimate that the regulatory relief benefits from this rule amount to $ 1 93.6 billion for the final rule Steps 1 and 2 of the phase

- in period (January

2, 2011 through July

1, 2013). There will be some cost s to society during this time from the potential loss of GHG emission reductions from small sources that could occur

### 9

during the Step s 1 and 2 phase

- in period . We are not able to quantify or monetize these potential foregone emission reductions resulting from this final rule

. 1.1 Summary of Analytical Approach for the Analysis Our anal ys is of the GHG tailoring rule includes several key elements including :
 specification of the baseline that requires title V and PSD permitting statutory thre sholds of 100/250 tpy CO 2 

### e potential to emit (PTE) ,  development of alternative regulatory relief thresholds including those authorized by this final rule,

 estimation of sources affected b y alternative regulatory relief thresholds,

 e stimation of the bene fits of this rule in terms of permitting burden costs avoided ,  qualitative discussion of social costs or potential GHG emission reductions foregone due to this rule , and

 estimation of the economic impacts of this final rule. A brief s ynopsis of these an al ytical aspects of the final rule follows. Analytical Baseline The baseline for this rulemaking is a state of regulation in which the statutory thresholds of 100/250 tpy CO 2 

### e apply for title V sources and new or modifying PSD sources beginning January 2, 2011 absent actions taken in the final tailoring rule. Figure 1 .0 below depicts this anal ytical baseline in which GHG permitting is statutorily required by

the CAA. Within this framework, there are two general possibilities

– ‘no action’ or ‘regulatory re lief action’ taken b y EPA. Under the ‘no action’ case baseline, statutory limits become effective and permitting authorities are overwhelmed with permit applications. Millions of new sources in total many of which have not been regulated under the Act wo uld be required to obtain title V sources and tens of thousands of these sources will face PSD permitting annuall y. In contrast, the EPA may take action as it has in this final rule to provide ‘regulatory relief’. As described, the ‘no action’ case is th e analy

tical baseline for this RIA. All alternatives anal yz ed in this RIA show the level of regulatory

relief in comparison to a baseline in which statutory CAA thresholds of 100 /250 tpy CO 2 

### e are required. R egulatory Alternatives, Affected Sources, and Av oided Permitting Cost Estimates All regulatory

alternatives evaluated in this RIA, except the ‘no action’ alternative, represent regulatory

relief possibilities that establish title V permitting thresholds and PSD

### 10

permitting thresholds and significance lev els above the statutory 100/250 tpy CO 2 

### e requirements. Due to the phase

- in nature of this rule, EPA anal yzes the benefits and costs of the tailoring rule for three different time periods. We anal yz e the net benefits of the rule annually to allow for a comparison of the final rule Steps 1 and 2 to be made with regulatory alternatives. We also evaluate the net benefits of the rule for the 21⁄2 years period of Steps 1 and 2 of the phase

- in period (January

2, 2011 through July

1, 2013) , and for the approximate five year period of Step 1, 2, and 3 of the phase

- in period January 2, 2011 through April 30, 2016 . Table 1.0 shows the final rule and regulatory

alternatives analyzed in this RIA for these differing time periods of the phase

- in

. The benefits of this rul e are the regulatory relief in the form of avoided permitting burdened cost for smaller sources of GHG and permitting authorities. Avoided permitting costs to these smaller GHG sources and permitting authorities are calculated b y estimating the number of sources and related permits avoided as a result of this rule. We then place a dollar value on these avoided permits by

estimating the burden cost per permit. The product of the avoided permits and the per permit costs represents the regulatory relief for this rule. Thus the annual regulatory

relief for the rule is equal to the number of annual sources (number of permits) above statutory thresholds of 100/250 tpy and below final rule thresholds multiplied by per permit costs for sources and permitting authorities, respectively . We use these annual estimates to calculate multiple year regulatory

relief for Steps 1 and 2 of the phase

- in and for the five years beginning January 2, 2011. Estimates of sources afforded regulatory relief under the alternative r egulatory thresholds are based upon an anal ys is completed by EPA that is included as Attachment B Technical Support Document for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Threshold Evaluation of this report. This analysis supports EPA's assessment of the administrative burden created by adding GHGs to the PSD and title V programs. It was necessary to develop information on the number of affected facilities at both the current permitting major source thresholds (100 tons per year for title V and 100 or 250 tons per year fo r PSD depending on the source category classification) and at alternative higher thresholds in existing PSD and title V permitting programs. An affected facility would be one who's annual emissions of GHG equal or exceed the major source threshold being evaluated. The number of sources allowed regulatory relief by this rule represents the difference in the number of sources at the baseline 100/250 tpy CO 2 

### e PTE threshold and at the higher regulatory alternative thresholds.

### 11

Figure 1.0. Alternative States o f Regulation Relating to the GHG Tailoring Rule
GHG Permitting Triggered

No Tailoring Rule Tailoring Rule

No Action Case Baseline


## * Statutory limits become effective 

## * Permitting authorities overwhelmed with permit applications, millions of new sources required to obtain permits Action Taken With Permit Trigger


## * RIA anal yz ed regulatory alternatives 

## * Significant reduction in facilities required to obtain permit and permitting authority burdens *Limited foregone GHG emission reductions

### 12

Table 1.0 Time Periods and Regulatory Alternatives Analyzed in the RIA Time Period of Analysis Regulatory Alternatives Thresholds Analyzed for Each Time Period 1 

### Annual 1. Any way 2. 1 00,000 tpy CO 2 

### e 3. 50,000 tpy CO 2 

### e 4. 25,000 tpy CO 2 

### e 2.5 -Year (Jan. 2, 2011

- July

1, 2013) Corresponds to Steps 1 and 2 of the Phase

- In Alternatives assuming threshold remain in effect for the entire 21⁄2 ye ars of the Step 1 and 2 phase

- in period): 1. 25,000 tpy CO 2 

### e (25,000 tpy CO 2 

### e significance level) 2. 50,000 tpy CO 2 

### e (50 ,000 tpy CO 2 

### e significance level) 3. 100,000 tpy CO 2 

### e 4. Any way Other alternatives involving thresholds that change during the phase

- in period are: 5. Step 1 Any

way for 6 months / Step 2 100,000 tpy CO 2 

### e for 2 ye ars 6. Step 1 Any

way threshold for 6 months / Step 2 50,000 tpy CO 2 

### e for 2 years 7 . Step1 Any

way threshold for 6 months / Step 2 25,000 tpy CO 2 

### e for 2 years 5 -year (Five ye ars beginning January 2, 2011) Corresp onds to Steps 1

- 3 of the Phase

- In 1. Step 1 Any way for 6 months/ Step2 100,000 tpy CO 2 

### e for 2 ye ars / Step 3 100,000 tpy CO 2 

### e for 21⁄2 years 2. Step 1 Any

way for 6 months / Step 2 100,000 tpy CO 2 

### e for 2 ye ars / Step 3 50,000 tpy CO 2 

### e for 21⁄2 years 1 Regulatory

relief relates to those sources with the potential to emit annual emissions below the threshold levels

. Threshold 100,000 tpy CO 2 e has significance level of 75,000 tpy CO 2 e . Threshold 50,000 tpy CO 2 e has significance level of 50,000 tpy CO 2 e, and threshold 25,000 tpy CO 2 e has significance level of 25,000 tpy CO 2 e 

### Regulatory

relief or avoided permit burden estimates are based upon p ermitting cost estimates developed b y EPA and discussed extensively in Attachment C Summary of Methodology and Data Used to Estimate Burden Relief and Evaluate Resource Requirements at Alternative Greenhouse Gas Permitting Thresholds

. . EPA conducted an assessment of the estimated resource requirements for sources to obtain title V operating permits, for new and modifying s ources to obtain PSD permits, and for permitting authorities to include GHG in permit actions at several possible major source permitting thresholds . EPA developed the burden reduction and costs savings for permitting authorities and sources as a result of requiring the inclusion of GHG in the title V and PSD permitting programs at thresholds greater than the current statutory

requirements. Time and costs associated with permit activities are derived from existing Information Collection Requests (ICRs) for the title V and PSD programs. Regulatory

### 13

relief avoided cost estimates do not include the costs for new and modifying PSD sources to comply with BACT requirements due to lack of sufficient data to estimate the BACT requirements and associated costs. We di scuss the costs of this rule in terms of foregone environmental benefits qualitatively in this report. There will be some costs to society during this phase

- in period from the potential loss of GHG emission reductions from small sources that could occur during the Steps 1 , 2 , and 3 . We are not able to quantify or monetize these potential foregone emission reductions resulting from this final rule. We also provide in this RIA an estimate of the economic impact of th e regulatory

relief to affected sources b y developing avoided

- cost - to - sale s ratios for the affected sources by comparing avoided permitting costs to average industry sales revenue or average revenue b y firm size

. Limitations and Uncertainties of the Analysis The benefits, costs and economic impacts estimated in this RIA are subject to limitations and uncertainties. The benefit s of this rule are the regulatory relief provided to small sources of GHG and permitting authorities. Regulatory relief estimates are provided for the final rule Steps 1 , 2 and 3 on an annual basis as well as for the full phase

- in period. The benefits or avoided permitting costs are based upon the best data available currentl y regarding sources affected and burden cost estimates but are subject to uncertainties. Benefit Estimate Limitations and Uncertainties Uncertainties exist in the affected source counts at different thresholds used to estimate regulatory

relief due to the absence of a comprehensive data set of facility

- level GHG emissions across all sectors on which to base the number of facilities subject to title V and PSD permitting at alternative regulatory

thresholds. These affected source counts are multiplied by the permit burden cost estimates to derive the benefit (regulatory relief) estimates for the rule. Although there are different levels of uncertainty in our facility

level estimates across sectors, we do believe that the data are sufficientl y robust to use in the aggregate to assess national permitting level impacts. The threshold analysis also conservatively assumes that no GHG PTE limits are in place for any of the affected sources. Some sources may use PTE limits to avoid being classified as major, which would reduce burden. The number of PTE limits is uncertain. We assume there will be a limited number in the immediate stages of GHG permitting for affected sources, but this assumption is subject to some uncertainty.

### 14

There is also significant uncertainty in both our modification rate for newl y major GHG sources and in our estimate of modificatio n activity at existing major sources that will become subject to PSD review for GHG emission increases. The general uncertainty results from inherent uncertainty in predicting not onl y how many major sources will elect to undergo physical or operational ch anges in any given ye ar, but also which of those changes would result in GHG emissions increases that would exceed a proposed GHG significance level. First, information is not available across sectors and source categories on the types and numbers of spec ific phys ical and operational changes that would result in GHG emissions increases in amounts that can be estimated and that therefore can be compared to various GHG emissions significance levels. Second, there is uncertainty in how many

project modifications will occur within any

given ye ar because decisions on these projects are driven by facility

- and sector

- based growth patterns and business planning decisions. Lastl y, some source categories and units that emit GHGs have not previously been subject to any

type of permitting or reporting requirements; as a result, for these sources, there is very little historical record for use in estimating the number and ty pes of projects that would occur at these sources and, in turn, establish an appropriate signif icance level for GHGs. The permit burden estimates that are multiplied by the source counts to derive the benefits of the rule are also subject to uncertainty. The primary reference sources for our estimate of burden hours and costs for permitting GHGs are the most recent I CRs for the PSD and title V programs. There a number of uncertainties introduced in using these references for costing GHG permitting activities. First, we are assuming that the average, conventional pollutant per

-permit costs will b e similar for GHGs. We do recognize the likelihood that residential and commercial permits would be simpler and have a lower per

- permit burden than traditional industrial sources, and have made adjustments for this: however, for industrial sources we assume per-permit costs on par with what are estimated in the latest I CRs for PSD and title V programs. There is uncertainty in appl ying these average ICR

- based costs to GHG permitting, even for industrial sources, because the best source of this cost information is permitting experience and there is no historical track record for permitting these GHG sources and thus any cost efficiencies that have been realized over the years for conventional pollutant permitting, and thus reflected in the current I CRs, may not be initially realized for GHG permitting.

### 15

As mentioned above, in our burden scenario analyses we do discount the ICR

- based per

permit costs for residential and commercial sources to reflect what we believe will generally be simpler permits, involving primarily uniform combustion ty

pe equipment. For PSD we discount the per

-permit cost by

30%, and for title V we discount the per

-permit cost by 50%. There is significant uncertainty in these estimated discounts since we have no track record for permitting these smaller commercial and residential sources. However, we do believe that, based solel y on the ty pe and uniformity of the GHG emission units that would be subject to permitting at these facilities under lower GHG threshold scenarios, that average per-permit costs would be less than those currentl y experienced by more complex industrial facilities, with numerous emission units, for currentl y regulated pollutants. Current avoided permitting cost or regulatory relief estimates also do not include the avoided costs to comply

with PSD BACT requirements due to lack of available data. This omission will tend to reduce the amount of regulatory relief that smaller sources of GHG will experience during the phase

- in period

. In addition to the avoided BACT co sts that we are unable to quantify , there are likely general economic costs associated with requiring permitting for these smaller sources of GHG. Numerous public comments on the proposed rule spoke to the economic burden permitting would place on sources above the actual costs to obtain a permit. These costs might include delays or impediments to entering a new market or to expand existing facilities to accommodate increased demand for products or services . These avoided costs might be viewed as additio nal costs of doing business or barriers to entry for these smaller sources of GHG
. The avoided economic costs of these possible additional costs or barriers to doing business have not been considered in the regulatory relief estimates provided for this final rule due to lack of sufficient information about these potential impacts

. If such avoided cost estimates were available, these estimates would tend to increase the regulatory relief burden reported for the final rule. For the phase

- in period regulatory relief multiyear estimates, we assume that the annual estimates are representative for each ye ar of the phase

- in period . This presumes that permitting activity would be constant over time. It is quite possible that permit activity for these smaller s ources may

grow over time with economic growth in the general economy and will likely vary from year to year due to differences in business activity . However, we do not have sufficient information about these year to year variations nor expected growth in permitting to develop

### 16

more precise estimates. Given the uncertainty in the annual relief estimates and the short time frame anal yz ed (five ye ars), we feel it reasonable to not consider these potential yearl y fluctuations for the phase

- in period. Consideration of growth in permits over time would tend to increase the regulatory

relief estimates reported for the final rule. In a similar manner, we do not discount the phase

- in regulatory relief to the present in this final report. Since the anal ytical time period evaluated varies from annual to five years, we feel this is a reasonable approach. Discounting the regulatory relief estimates to present values would tend to lower the total present value amount of regulatory relief reported. Social Cost Limitations and Uncertainties The social costs of this rule are the foregone environmental benefits that might occur during the phase

- in period absent this rulemaking. This subject is discussed in Section 4 of the RIA. We are unable to estimate the PSD BACT requirements that would likely occur for the smaller sources of GHG at this time. Because BACT is a case

- by

- case decision and evolves over time, because we do not at this time have historical experience with the available controls for small

- source GHG emi ssions, and because of the inherent uncertainty in describing the typ es of sources that would have triggered BACT absent this rule, we cannot quantify the emission reductions that might be feasible or the associated pollution control costs. For this reason, the social costs of this rule are discussed qualitativel y in this RIA. Economic Impact Limitations and Uncertainties As previously

discussed there is uncertainty in the estimates of source s affected by this final rule and the permitting burden costs use d to estimate the benefits (regulatory relief) of this rule. These uncertainties also affect the economic impact anal ys is conducted. In the economic impact anal ys is, we compare the avoided permit burden cost estimates to average industry revenues in order to gauge the magnitude of regulatory relief for affected sources. We used average industry

revenue, and average revenue estimates by firm size to estimate avoided

- cost to - sales ratios due to lack of data specific to the sources actuall y obtaining regulatory relief. The actual benefits to individual firms affected b y this rule may differ from industry

averages. 1.2 Benefits, Cost, and Net Benefits of the Final Tailoring Rule In the RIA, we estimated the benefits, costs and net benefits of the final rule. This rulemaking provides regulatory relief for a phase

- in period of approximately 5 years to smaller sources of GHG b y phasing in the statutory permitting threshold at levels above statutory

### 17

requirements

. This final rule establishes thresholds and PSD s ignificance levels for Steps 1 and 2 of the phase

- in period ( the 2 1⁄2 year period between January 2, 2011 and July

1, 2013) , commits to considering a further Step 3, and indicates floor title V and PSD threshold levels from July 1, 2013 through April 30, 201 6. While the EPA commits to undertake a rulemaking for a further S tep 3, the ultimate outcome for sources of GHG from this additional rulemaking is unknown at this time

. Annual e stimates for the final rule Steps 1 and 2 and regulatory alternatives are presented in Table 1.1. As Table 1.1 indicates, the annual net benefits associated with the final rule Step 1 are $ 77,5 30.2 million + B

- C and for Step 2 are $77,4 16.2 + B

- C million, where B denotes the unquantified benefits and C the quantified costs of this final rule. These unquantified benefits and costs are discussed in more detail in the preceding limitations and uncertainties section of this executive summary

. Table 1 .2 shows the final rule Steps 1 and 2 with regulatory alternatives for the two and one

- half ye ar phase

- in period January 2, 2011 through July

1, 2013. The net benefits of the final rule for Steps 1 and 2 are $193, 59 7.5 + B

- C million for the two and one - half ye ar period. Finally , Table 1.3 presents the final rule net benefits with two alternatives for Step 3, one in which Step 3 remains at the Step 2 100,000 tpy CO2e level and one in which Step 3 becomes the minimum threshold of at least 50,000 tpy CO2e previously

discussed. These alternatives for Step 3 bound the net benefit estimates f or the entire phase in period. If Step 3 remains at the Step 2 level, net benefits for the five year period are $ 387,1 53.4 +B

- C million. This net benefit estimate become s $ 386, 7 24.1 + B

- C million if Step 3 becomes the minimum level of 50,000 tpy threshold for the five ye ar phase

- in period

. Given the short time frame of the impact of this final rule, we did not consider the time value of money or discount the benefit and cost estimates provided in this report to present values , rather we assume th e se benefit and cost estimates are occurring currentl y. All dollar estimates shown are based upon 2007$.

### 18

Table 1. 1 Annual Net Benefits for GHG Tailoring Rule Regulatory Alternatives Annual Benefits and Costs for Regulatory Alternatives (millions of 2007$) Final Rule Step 1 Final Rule Step 2 Anyway 100,000 tpy CO2e 50,000 tpy CO2e 25,000 tpy CO2e Benefits - Regulatory Relief Sources Title V 1 $49,457.3 $49,447.4 $49,403.8 $49,334.2 PSD 2 $5,488.8 $5,411.2 $5,326.0 $4,707.6 Tota l Source Regulatory Relief $54,946.1 $54,858.6 $54,729.8 $54,041.8 Permitting Authority Title V 1 $21,0 7 7. 6 $21,0 72.4 $21,0 52.8 $21,0 1 4. 9 PSD 2 $1,506.5 $1,485.2 $1,461.8 $1,291.7 Total Permitting Authority $22,5 84
. 1 $22, 557.6 $22,5 14.6 $2 2, 306.6 Total Regulatory Relief $77 , 5 30. 2 +B $77,4 16.2 +B $77,2 44.4 +B $76,3 48.4 +B Costs - Foregone GHG Emission Reductions Title V & PSD C C C C Net Benefits 3 $77 , 5 30. 2 +B - C $77, 416.2 +B - C $77,2 44.4 +B - C $76,3 48.4 +B - C Benefits relate to regulatory relief for sources with annual potential to emit levels below the thresholds shown

. B
- unquantified benefits of the rule include regulatory relief from BACT requirements for PSD sources C
- unquantified social costs of tailoring rule represents economic value of foregone environmental benefits (possible GHG emission reductions) during Step 1 and 2 of the phase in period. Potential foregone GHG emission reductions during the phase

- in period are not known at this time. See Sectio n 4 of the RIA for a qualitative discussion of the social costs of the rule. 1Reflects estimates of regulatory relief or avoided permit burden costs for title V GHG sources and permitting authorities. 2 Shows estimates of regulatory relief or avoided permit burden costs for GHG PSD sources and permitting authorities. 3 Totals may not sum due to rounding.

### 19

T able 1. 2 . Net Benefits for the Final Rule and Regulatory Alternatives for Steps 1 and 2 of the Phase - In Period Benefits and Cost s for Step 1 and 2 Phase - In Period (January 2, 2011 - July 1, 2013)

For Regulatory Alternatives (millions of 2007$) Anyway 3 100,000 tpy

CO2e 3 50,000 tpy CO2e 3 25,000 tpy CO2e 3 Anyway/ 50 ,000

tpy CO2e 4 Anyway/25 ,000

tpy CO2e 5 Final Rule 6 Benefits - Regulatory Relief Sources Title V 1 $123,643.3 $123,618.5 $123,509.5 $123,335.5 $123,536.3 $123,397.1 $123,623.5 PSD 2 $13,722.0 $13,528.0 $13,315.0 $11,769.0 $13,396.4 $12,159.6 $13,566.8 Total Source Regulatory Relief $137,365.3 $137,146.5 $136,824.5 $135,104.5 $136,932.8 $135,556.6 $137,190.3 Permitting Authority Title V 1 $52, 694.1 $5 2,681 $52, 631.9 $52,5 37.3 $52, 6 44.3 $5 2,56 8.7 $52, 6 83.6 PSD 2 $3,766.3 $3,713.0 $3,654.5 $3,229.3 $3,676.8 $3,336.7 $3,723. 6 Total Perm itting Authority $56,4 60.4 $56, 393.9 $56, 286.3 $55, 766.7 $56, 3 21.1 $55, 90 5.4 $56, 40 7.2 Total Regulatory Relief $193, 825.6 +B $193 ,540.4 +B $193, 110.9 +B $190,8 71.1 +B $193,2 53.9 +B $191,4 62.0 +B $193,5 9 7.5 +B Costs - Foregone GHG Emission Redu ctions Title V & PSD C C C C C C C Net Benefits $193, 825.6 +B- C $193,5 40.4 +B- C $193, 110.9 + B- C $190,8 71 . 1 +

B- C $193,2 53.9 +

B- C $191,4 62.0 +

B- C $193,5 9 7.5 +

B- C Benefits represent regulatory relief for those sources with the annual potential to emit less than the threshold shown. B
- unquantified benefits of the rule include regulatory relief from BACT requirements for PSD sources C
- unquantified social costs of tailoring rule represents economic value of foregone environmenta l benefits (potential GHG emission reductions) during Step 1 and 2 of the phase in period. Foregone GHG emission reductions are not known at this time. See Section 4 of the RIA for a qualitative discussion of the social costs of the rule. 1Reflects esti mates of regulatory relief or avoided permit burden costs for title V GHG sources and permitting authorities. 2 Shows estimates of regulatory relief or avoided permit burden costs for GHG PSD sources and permitting authorities. 3 Shows alternative as singl e step for the 21⁄2.year phase

- in period for 'anyway', 100,000 tpy CO2e, 50,000 tpy CO2e, and 25,000 tpy CO2 e thresholds respectively. 4 Include s Step 1 for one

- half year and 50,000 tpy CO2e threshold for two years. 5 Includes Step 1 for one

- half year and 25,000 tpy CO2e threshold for two years. 6 Phase

- in period for final rule includes 1/2 year of Step 1 thresholds and 2 years of Step 2 threshold.

### 20

Table 1. 3 Net Benefits of the Final Rule and Step 3 Regulatory Alternatives
Regulatory Alternativ e (millions 2007$) Final Rule + Possible Step 3 of 100, 000 tpy CO2e 3 50, 000 tpy CO2e 4 Benefits - Regulatory Relief Sources Title V 1 $247,253.6 $247,145.3 PSD 2 $27,094.7 $26,881.8 Total Source Regulatory Relief $274,348.3 $274,0 27.1 Permitting Authority Title V 1 $105,3 68.5 $105,318.8 PSD 2 $7,436.61 $7,378.1 Total Permitting Authority $112, 805.1 $112,696.8 Total Regulatory Relief $387, 153.4 +B $386,719.4+B Costs - Foregone GHG Emission Reductions Title V & PSD C C Net Benefits $387, 153.4 + B- C $ 386,7 24.1 + B- C Benefits represent regulatory relief for sources with the annual potential to emit below the thresholds shown. B
- unquantified benefits of the rule include regulatory relief from BACT requirements for PSD sources C
- unquantified social costs of tailoring rule represents economic value of foregone environmental benefits (potential GHG emission reductions) during Step 1, 2,and 3 of the phase in period. Foregone GHG emission reductions are not known at this time. See Section 4 of the RIA for a qualitative discussion of the social costs of the rule. 1Reflects estimates of regulatory relief or avoided permit burden costs for title V GHG sources and permitting authorities. 2 Shows estimates of regulatory relief or avoided permit burden costs for GHG PSD sources and permitting authorities. 3 Includes 1⁄2 year of Step 1 (anyway threshold), 4 1⁄2 years of Step 2 (100,000 threshold), 4 Includes 1⁄2 ye ar of Step 1 (anyway threshold), 2 years of Step 2 (100,000 threshold), and 2 1⁄2 years Step 3 alternative of 50,000.



### 1.3 Organization of this Report The remainder of this report supports and details the methodology and the results of this illustrative RIA
.  Section 2 presents a discussion of the regulatory baseline, regulatory alternatives and affected entities

.

 Section 3 describes the benefits of the rule

.

### 21

 Section 4 provides a qualitative description of social costs of the rule.

 Section 5 presents the benefits, costs, and net benefits of the rule.

 Se ctio n 6 describes the methodology and the estimated economic impacts of the regulatory

relief

.

 Section 7 discusses small business impacts, unfunded mandates, and effects of the rule on energy

supply

 Section 8 describes limitations and uncertainties of the analysis

 Section 9 lists the references for the anal ys es included in this RIA.

### 22 Section 2 Baseline Description, Regulatory Alternatives , and Affected Entities As previously

stated, this final rule is essentiall y providing regulatory relief and does not include direct regulatory

provisions for any

industrial, commercial , or residential entities. An anal ys is is presented for smaller sources that experience regulatory relief

. This rule increases the GHG applicability threshold for title V from 100 tpy CO 2 

### e and for n ew and modifying sources of GHG emissions from the CAA mandated 100 or 250 tpy CO 2 

### e major source applicability threshold in a phased

- in step process described in Table 2.0. Table 2 . 0 . Phase - I n Steps for Large Sources for the Final GHG Tailoring Rul e 1 PSD Title V Step 1 : Phase - in of Large Sources (January 2, 2011

– June 30, 2011) (referred to as ‘anyway’ threshold or Step 1 ) Permitting based on emissions of non

- GHG pollutants and, for BACT applicability with GHG emissions or GHG emission increases above 75,000 tpy CO 2 e Sources with title V permits for non

GHG pollutants will address GHG as part of title V permitting

Step 2 : Phase in for Large Sources (July 1, 2011

– June 30, 2013) (referred to as 100,000 tpy CO 2 e threshold or Step 2 ) Sources above 100,000 tpy (new) and 75,000 tpy (major mo difications) of CO 2 e (and not already subject to PSD based on non

- GHG ) Sources that exceed 100,000 tpy GHG threshold will be required to obtain a title V permit if they do not already have one Step 3 : Phase in f

or Large Sources ( July 1, 2013

– April 30, 2016 ) Effective only after additional regulatory process An enforceable commitment to assess experience from Steps 1 and 2; commit to propose, consider comments, and promulgate potential Step 3 (level will not go below 50,000 tpy CO 2 e [ ne w] and 50,000 tpy CO 2 e [ major mo difications ]) An enforceable commitment to assess experience from Steps 1 and 2; commit to propose, consider comments, and promulgate potential Step 3 (level will not go below 50,000 tpy CO 2 e)

Fina l Phase Effective only after additional regulatory process EPA will take rulemaking action in 2016 or before to address small sources in light of the 5

- year study EPA will take rulemaking action in 2016 or before to address small sources in light of the 5

- year study
1 Thresholds/significance levels are based on PTE
. 

### The rules also sets GHG significance levels for each step under PSD to determine applicability as it relates to GHG emissions or emission increases for projects at major sources. The baselin e for this rulemaking is a state of regulation in which the statutory thresholds of 100/250 tpy

CO 2 

### e apply

for title V sources and new or modifying PSD sources beginning January 2, 2011 absent actions taken in the final tailoring rule. Within this framewo rk, there are

### 23

two general possibilities

– ‘no action’ or ‘regulatory relief action’ taken by

EPA. Under the ‘no action’ case baseline, statutory limits become effective and permitting authorities are overwhelmed with permit applications. Millions of new sources in total many of which have not been regulated under the Act are required to obtain title V sources and tens of thousands of these sources will face PSD permitting annuall y. In contrast, the EPA may take action as it has in this final rule to prov ide ‘regulatory relief’. As described, the ‘no action’ case is the analy tical baseline for this RIA. All alternatives anal yz ed in this RIA show the level of regulatory relief in comparison to a baseline in which statutory CAA thresholds of 100 /250 tpy CO 2 

### e are required. F or larger sources of GHG , there are no direct economic burdens or costs as a re sult of this rule, because requirements to obtain a title V operating permit or to adhere to PSD requirements of the CAA are already m andated by the Act and b y existing rules and are not imposed as a result of this rulemaking. In order to anal yz e the baseline administrative burden created b y adding GHGs to existing PSD and title V permitting programs, it was necessary to develop information on the number of a ffected facilities at the current permitting major source thresholds (generally, 100 tons per year for Title V and 100 or 250 tons per year for PSD depending on the source category classification)

. An affected facility would be one who's annual emissions of the GHG equal or exceed the major source threshold , based on a PTE basis. Detailed descriptions of the methodologies used are provided in Attachments B and C of the RIA. An explanation of the uncertainties associated with this methodo logy is discussed in Section 8 of this report

. The following are the basic steps used in the methodology to estimate affected sources and permitting actions under the baseline scenario. 1) Identify GHG source categories . EPA evaluated the same range of stationary sourc e ty pes with direct GHG emissions as identified in EPA’s proposed and final GHG mandatory reporting rule (MRR) 2 

### . The GHG MRR source categories were based on a comprehensive review of all U.S. source categories with GHG emissions from EPA’s national inventory of GHG

2 

### 74 FR 68, pp. 16447

– 16731 and 74 FR 209, pp. 56260

- 56519, respectively.

### 24

emissions 3 

### . The stationary sources evaluated in this anal ys is can be grouped in the sectors shown below:

● Electricity

Generation (facilities with fossil fuel

- fired electric generating units); ● Industry

(range of industries with process and combustion GHG emissions);
● Energy

(oil and gas extraction, transport, and processing; underground coal mining); ● Was te Treatment (landfills and municipal solid waste incinerators);
● Agriculture (stationary fuel combustion units); ● Commercial (variety of establishments including office, retail, hospitals, lodging, etc.);
● Residential (single

- family and multi

- family h ousing). A small number of direct emission source ty pes included in the GHG MRR anal ys is were not included in the tailoring rule anal ys is because the GHG emissions from these sources were primarily fugitive emissions. Fugitive emissions are generally defined as emissions which are not released, or could not be reasonabl y collected and released, through a stack or vent. Under the PSD rules, fugitive emissions are only included in potential to emit estimates if the source is one of 28 listed PSD source cate gories. The excluded categories included e lectrical equipment fugitive SF 6 

### emissions ; w astewater treatment plant fugitive emissions not associated with one of 28 listed PSD source categories; and, agricultural manure management fugitive emissions. 2) Estimate Actual Facility Level GHG Emissions

. We started with estimates of facility emissions based on actual operating conditions, not PTE, since this is the standard format of the EPA’s national inventory of GHG emissions. Actual emissions for each source category were obtained from earlier analyses performed to develop emission thresholds for the proposed and final GHG MRR, or we used the same data sources when additional anal ys es were required. EPA generall y relied o n published research and publicly avai lable government data, such as EPA ' s e GRID database of electric generating source emission s , Economic and Housing Census data, and Energy

Information Agency

(EIA) data o n energy

consumption. See Attachment B for full descriptions of the methodologies used to estimate emissions for each source category

.

3 

### U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990

– 2007, April 2009, US EPA 430

- R
- 09
- 004. http://www.epa.gov/cl imatechange/emissions/usinventory report.html

### 25

3) Estimate PTE

- based Facility Level GHG Emissions

. Itwas necessary to convert actual emissions to a PTE basis, because as noted earlier, that is the basis for determining applicability

under PSD and titl e V. PTE is generally defined as the amount of emissions that can be emitted from a source operating at full equipment capacity , 24 hours per day , 365 days per year. Capacity

information and annual GHG emissions were available for some of the source cate gories from analyses performed to support the GHG MRR. In some cases the supporting anal ys es had already calculated GHG emissions on a full capacity basis, in which case EPA directly used those estimates as PTE estimates. Alternatively , some data from th e supporting anal ys is estimated actual annual emissions using a baseline year. If capacity and baseline ye ar production information was provided in the supporting data, EPA adjusted the source actual emissions estimate by

the ratio of annual capacity to b aseline production to estimate PTE. If capacity information was not available , EPA used capacity factors from other data sources to adjust actual emission estimates to PTE estimates. These capacity factors add varying uncertainty to the PTE estimate. Detailed descriptions of the different PTE calculation methodologies are included in the source descriptions in Attachment B

. 4 ) Count Facilities that Exceed the Baseline GHG Thresholds

. After compiling facility level PTE

-based emission under Step 3, these e stimates were evaluated against the threshold levels in order to determine whether or not a facility would be included in the baseline threshold count. The number of facilities exceeding the baseline threshold based on a PTE basis were then identified as ‘major sources’ for the purposes of GHG permitting under PSD and title V. Our facility

counts include both existing sources that would exceed the baseline GHG thresholds and newly constructed sources . Newl y constructed sources onl y represent a small fraction (less than 2 percent for the baseline scenario) of the total population of GHG major sources in a given ye ar. Growth rates used to estimate new construction were based on a variety of sources including Economic Census data, EIA energy survey data, and various EPA regulatory

impact anal ys es and information collection requests which require source population estimates. In some cases there was sufficient information to distribute new sources to different thresholds based on emission information specifi c to the new sources (electric generating, municipal solid waste combustors, and commercial stationary fuel combustion). 5) Estimate total permitting actions for PSD and title V based on facility counts . The next basic step was to estimate permitting actions that result from the baseline facility counts.

### 26

For PSD, this required an estimate of modifications at existing facilities in addition to the estimate of newl y constructed facilities from step 4. Our estimate for modifications at existing facilities is based on calculating how many of the facilities identified as major sources would undergo a modification project that would exceed our baseline GHG thresholds. The methodology

for estimating modifications is described in detail in Attachment C. The b asic methodology

for estimating modifications at existing, but newl y classified GHG major sources, under PSD was to appl y a 4 percent modification rate to the population of facilities that exceed the threshold. For title V, any facility, existing or newl y constructed, that exceeded the baseline thresholds for GHG permitting (i.e., 100 tpy CO2e) was considered to be required to get a title V permit under the baseline scenario. 6) Calculate costs for permitting actions . The total permitting actions calculated under step 5 above, were then combined with average permitting costs for each type of permitting activity for PSD and title V to calculate overall permitting burden. See Attachment C for full description on assumptions regarding permitting costs and h ow these were applied to different permitting actions under PSD and title V. 7) Adjustments based on public comment on proposal . We made three main adjustments to our basic methodology based on public comments received on our proposal. Two of these affec ted the estimate of modifications under PSD. Many commenters indicated that they felt EPA had underestimated the number of modification permitting actions associated with PSD. Our proposed general modification rate (2 percent of the newl y major facility population) used to estimate modifications at existing, but newly newly major GHG sources did not appear to have caught the extent to which facility level changes could result in projects that exceed the GHG permitting threshold. In reassessing this modi fication rate, we determined that we had not full y accounted for all possible PSD modifications relative to the major source population in calculating this modification rate. Based on this reassessment we revised our general modification rate to 4 percent (as noted above in step 5) that is used to estimate the annual modification activity

at existing, but newly

major GHG sources. Another adjustment to the PSD modifications methodology was based on public comments on the proposal that we did not fully account for the number of major modification projects at existing major sources because we did not capture the number of existing projects that avoid major PSD review (by either taking limits

— sy

nthetic based modifications

—or by netting

### 27

out) for existing pollut ants but that would not be able to avoid PSD for GHGs. Our modifications methodology , as described in Attachment C, now specifically includes additional modifications for these projects that would not be able to avoid PSD review because of their GHG emiss ions. Lastl y, based on public on public comments we revised our estimate of capacity utilization used for estimating PTE

-based emissions for the general manufacturing source category (referred to as ‘unspecified stationary combustion’ in the GHG thresho ld anal ys is in Attachment B ) and the oil and gas industry . In our proposal, the range for capacity utilization for ‘unspecified stationary

combustion’ varied from 70 to 90 percent depending on manufacturing category , and for the oil and gas industry we us ed 90 percent. Based on comments received indicating that these utilization rates are higher than what is normall y achieved in real

- world conditions, particularl y for smaller manufacturing ty pe facilities, we used a 50 percent capacity utilization rate fo r both of these source categories. We believe that these assumptions better reflect what can be deemed reasonable operation under normal conditions for facilities in these source categories. The baseline affected sources estimated using the preceding met hodology are shown on Table 2.1. As Table 2.1 shows, EPA estimates the total number of title V sources and the annual estimate of new PSD sources that would be required to obtain permits absent this tailoring rule in a world where EPA takes ‘no action’. These affected source estimates provide a baseline on which to estimate the regulatory relief allowed by

EPA in this final rule and possible at alternative regulatory

thresholds. We compare these baseline affected source counts to the sources counts at alternative regulatory relief thresholds to determine the number of sources likely to obtain regulatory

relief due to the tailoring rule. All regulatory

alternatives evaluated in this RIA, except the ‘no action’ alternative, represent regulatory

relief pos sibilities that establish title V permitting thresholds and PSD permitting thresholds and significance levels above the statutory 100/250 tpy CO 2 

### e requirements. In this RIA, EPA anal yz es the benefits and costs of the tailoring rule for thresholds finalize d in this rule for Steps 1 and 2 of the phase

- in period, as well as, the proposal thresholds of 25,000 tpy CO 2 

### e and a possible Step 3 minimum threshold level of 50,000 tpy CO 2 

### e . The annual levels of regulatory

relief associated with these regulatory alter natives are evaluated, as well as, two

### 28

and one

- half year estimates that cover th e Steps 1 and 2 phase

- in period and for the full phase

- in period of approximately

5 years. For the initial phase

- in Step 1 , only title V and new PSD sources already applying fo r permits due to air pollutants other than GHG emissions are required to obtain a permit. New PSD sources required to obtain permits for GHG must also comply with BACT requirements for GHG
. However, under Step 1, only modification projects or sources with GHG emissions or emission increases that equal or exceed 75,000 tpy CO 2 

### e PTE are required to comply with BACT requirements for GHG emissions. During Step 2 of the phase

- in, source s at or above 100,000 tpy CO 2 

### e PTE are required to a obtain title V permit . Likewise , new sources at or above the 100,000 tpy CO 2 

### e PTE and modifying sources with PTE at or above 75,000 tpy CO 2 

### e are required to compl y with the requirements of PSD . After the initial two steps of the phase

- in, EPA will determin e whether a Step 3 that lower s thresholds below 100,000 tpy CO 2 

### e PTE beginning July

2013 is feasible . However , in this final rule , the Agency is making an enforceable commitment to conduct a regulatory

- setting process to consider the experience during the initial steps prio r to lowering the threshold in a further Step 3 . EPA also commits to not lowering the threshold below 50,000 tpy CO 2 

### e PTE until 2016. EPA will also conduct a study of permitting process es at existing levels in the next 5 years and determin e whether thres holds can be lowered below 50,000 tpy CO 2 

### e PTE after another regulatory process. At proposal, EPA identif

ied as the pollutant s subject to PSD and title V the group of up to six GHG emissions, each one weighted for its global warming potential (GWP) , that are included in regulations for their control under the CAA. EPA also propose d to conform its action on PSD state implementation plans (SIPs) and title V programs to match the proposed Federal applicability

requirements. Inits proposed rule, EPA provide d temporary regulatory

relief for sources of GHG emissions below a level of 25,000 tpy CO 2 

### e PTE
. The rationale for finalizing the previously described threshold s in the tailoring rule is based in part on our review of the costs and benefits associated with the different thresholds evaluated and described in this RIA. However, the primary basis for choosing the threshold enumerated in Table 2.0 is to ensure consistency with the legal doctrines set forth in the preamble of the tailoring rule. To appl y the statutory PSD and title V applicability thresholds to sources of GHG emissions would create immediate and insuperable administrative burdens for permitting authorities and perhaps absurd results . By establishing the applicability thresholds at

### 29

the levels for the first and second step s of the phase

- in period , we would avoid an administratively

impossible scenario where each year tens of thousands of new sources and modifications would become subject to PSD review , and, in total, millions of sources would re quire title V operating permits. We used the results of this RIA to support the threshold decision s, which we believe would result in a variance from existing statutory permitting thresholds that would

—consistent with the supporting legal rationale

— be as limited as possible and with consideration given to costs and benefits as described in this RIA

. Table 2.2 describes qualitatively the benefits, costs, and economic impacts anal yz ed for regulatory

alternatives in this RIA. As shown in Table 2.1, leaving the CAA thresholds unchanged for sources of GHG emissions is the baseline or ‘no action’ alternative that will render this tailoring rule as having no impact on sources or permitting authorities beyond the current CAA requirements. In this ‘no action’ case , we are simply comparing the baseline to itself. Thus, this is a regulatory alternative with zero benefits and zero costs. Under this alternative, small and large sources of GHG emissions will be required to obtain title V operating and PSD permits as mandated b y the Act. Although this alternative is considered for anal ytical completeness, its impact is essentially the same as no GHG tailoring rule and no further discussion of this alternative is considered in this document. In addition to the ‘no actio n’ alternative, this RIA examines Step 1 and 2 thresholds of the phase

- in final rule, as well as a less Table 2.1. Baseline Sources Subject to Statutory Permit Requirements

Notes: Title V sources are the total number of sources estimated to require an operating permit under statutory CAA thresholds. PSD sources are new source estimates anticipated to require compliance with permitting annually. E stimates for PSD sources are for newly constructed facilities and do not include modifications at existing facilities that may also be subject to PSD requirements. 

### Sector Baselin e Number of Sources Requiring Permits 100/250 tpy CO2e Threshold s Title V New PSD Electricity 2,237 93 Industrial 178,037 604 Energy 5,000 48 Waste Treatment 4,206 2 Agriculture 37,351 299 Commercial 1,355,921 12,041 Residential 4,535,500 6,915 Totals 6,118,252 20,002

### 30

than 50,000 tpy

CO 2 

### e threshold (meaning sources below 50,000 tpy obtain regulatory

relief and this is the minimum level for potential Step 3) and a less th an 25,000 tpy CO 2 

### e threshold (meaning sources below 25,000 tpy obtain regulatory

relief and this is the proposed rule threshold level) regulatory alternatives. The benefits of this rule (and the alternatives considered) are the permit burden costs avoided due to increasing the threshold levels above current CAA requirements as reflected in Table 2.1 . Under this final rule, millions of title V sources in total and thousands of PSD sources annually are afforded regulatory relief. For each of the regulatory alternatives increasing the threshold above statutory levels, the benefits of this tailoring rule are primarily the avoided permitting costs for affected small sources of GHG emissions. The permitting costs avoided b y small sources are quantified for the final rule Step 1 and 2 thresholds and each of the regulatory alternatives in Section 3 of this document

. The avoided costs associated with compliance with BACT requirements for PSD new and modifying sources are addressed qualitatively in this RIA because of lack of sufficient data to estimate quantitative BACT requirements for affected GHG sources. The industry

categories for sources anticipated to experience regulatory relief at the threshold levels finalized in this regulation are shown in Table 2.3. A s Table 2.3 shows, this action lifts permitting requirements for over 6 million potential title V sources in total and tens of thousands of potential PSD new and modifying sources annually otherwise required by the CAA to obtain permits . The estimates fo r title V sources represent the total number of sources afforded regulatory

relief by this rule and for regulatory alternatives. In contrast, the estimates shown for PSD represent the annual estimate of new PSD sources expected to experience regulatory re lief from this rule. For additional industry details including applicable affected industry North American Classification System (NAI CS) codes see Attachment A “Source Categories Affected by the Rule with Industry Detail.” EPA considered a number of factor s involving administrative burden and necessity in finalizing the thresholds for this rule, including comments received in response to the proposed rule. After considering the comments regarding the number of affected sources at various thresholds, EPA revised its estimates of sources potentially required to obtain permits significantl y increasing the number of affected sources at the alternativ e threshold/significance levels as discussed in detail previously

.

### 31

Table 2. 2 . Qualitative Description of Benefit s and Cost of the Tailoring Rule

Description No Action

Alternative (Thresholds Rem ain at 100/250 tpy) 1 Alternative

(Proposal) 25,000 tpy GHG Emission Threshold 2 Alternative

50,000 tpy GHG Emission Threshold 2 Step 2

100,000 tpy GHG Emission Threshold 2 Ste p 1

Anyway Threshold 2 Benefits (Regulatory relief

—avoided permitting requirements and associated costs) No avoided

permitting costs (i.e., over 6 million title V sources in total and over 80 thousand PSD small new and mo difying GHG sources annually (over 240 thousand PSD sources during Steps 1 and 2 ) remain subject to programs) Avoid

permitting costs for 6.098 million title V sources in total and for 72.3 thousand ne w and modifying PSD sources annually (or 216.9 thousand PSD sources during the Steps 1 and 2 time period) Avoid

permitting costs for 6.102 million sources in total and for 79.7 thousand new and mo difying PSD sources annually (or 239.1 thousand PSD sources during the Steps 1 and 2 time period) Avoid

permitting costs for 6.105 million sources in total and for 80.7 thousand new and mo difying PSD sources annually (or 24 2.1 thousand PSD sources during the Steps 1 and 2 time period) Avoid

permitting costs for 6.106 million sources in total and for 81.6 thousand new and mo difying PSD sources annually (or 24 4.8 thousand PSD sources during the Steps 1 and 2 time period)
Social Costs (Foregone emission reductions due to regulating GHG sources) No foregone

emission reductions Foregone GHG

emission reductions for affected sources (addressed qualitatively) Foregone GHG

emission reductions for affected sources (addressed qualitatively) Foregone GHG

emission reductions for affected sources (addressed qualitatively) Foregone GHG

emission reductions for affected sources (addressed qualitatively) Economic Impact s (Avoided costs compared to annual sales or revenue data for affected sources) No avoided costs Im pact of avoided costs (benefits) compared to annual sales revenues of affected sources Im

pact of avoided costs (benefits) compared to annual sales revenues o f affected sources Im

pact of avoided costs (benefits) compared to annual sales revenues of affected sources Im

pact of avoided costs (benefits) compared to annual sales revenues of affected sources
1 This table recognizes that triggering for GHG permitting has occurred with promulgation of the LDVR . Because of this event, s ources with the potential to emit 100 tpy CO 2 e are required to obtain a title V permit and new or mo difying sources with the potential to emit 250 tpy are required to obtain a PSD permit as mandated by the CAA

. If current threshold levels in the CAA remain unchanged for GHG emissions, the tailoring rule has no effect on sources or permitting authorities and provide s no regulatory relief to sources or permitting authorities

. 2 Promulgated Steps 1 and 2 thresholds and alternative regulatory thresholds are shown

. Threshold levels represent PTE levels for affected sources. Sources affected, enumerated above, represent sources, permits, or actions. Alternative 50,000 tpy CO 2 e is the minimum threshold level to be considered for a possible Step 3.

### 32

Table 2 . 3 . Estimated Number of Affected Sources Experiencing Regulatory Relief for Final Rule and Regulatory Alternatives 1, 2 , 3 Number of Sources Experiencing Regulatory Relief 25,000 CO 2 e tpy 50,000 CO 2 e tpy Final Rule : Step 2 100,000 CO 2 e tpy Final Rule : Step 1

Anyway Threshold Sector Title V New PSD Title V New PSD Title V New PSD Title V New PSD Electricity 161 20 285 29 285 33 285 93 Industrial 166,908 574 168,976 586 170,654 599 170,91 0 604 Energy 2,401 23 2,513 38 2,536 44 2,588 48 Waste Treatment 1,431 0 2,448 1 3,165 1 3,358 2 Agriculture 37,351 299 37,351 299 37,351 299 37,351 299 Commercial 1,354,760 12,034 1,355,321 12,038 1,355,870 12,039 1,355,921 12,041 Residential 4,535, 340 6,912 4,535,480 6,915 4,535,500 6,915 4,535,500 6,915 Totals 6,098,352 19,862 6,102,374 19,906 6,105,361 19,930 6,105,913 20,002 % Emissions Covered4 3% 8% 11% 13% 1 Number of sources is determined on a PTE basis. Estimate s for PSD sources are for newly constructed facilities and do not include modifications at existing facilities that may also be subject to PSD requirements. Source estimates shown above represent the total number of title V sources potentially afforded regulatory relief during Step 1 and 2 of the phase

- in period . In contrast , for new PSD sources, the estimates shown are the annual estimates of permits avoided for new small PSD GHG sources. 2 See Attachment B for more details of how thresholds and sources affected were developed. 3 The “no action” alternative is not included since the number of sources experiencing regulatory relief for this regulatory alternative is by definition zero. 4 Percentage of emissions covered represent s estimated actual emissions from sources expected to experience regulatory relief as a percentage of total stationary source GHG emissions. 

### When comparing the regulatory alternative s for revised affected sources at alternative thresholds as discussed above, there are difference s between them. The reason th e thresholds and significance levels are chosen as shown in Table 2.0 for Steps 1 and 2 of the phase

- in period with an additional Step 3 to be considered onl y after a subsequent regulatory process is because permitting authorities cannot immediately accomm odate a huge increase in permitting. The threshold s chosen for Steps 1 and 2 are chosen over the proposal level of 25,000 tpy CO 2 

### e , because evidence suggests that permitting authorities can run programs for the levels of permitting that would be required Steps 1 and 2 , and EPA believes legal doctrine requires the threshold to be as low as administratively feasible. The cho ice of a threshold is a balancing act of administrative considerations between threshold levels that EPA feels are not administratively feasible at this time ( i.e., 25 ,000 tpy CO 2 

### e potential to emit threshold) compared to threshold levels that are not impossible such as the Step 1 ‘any way ’ threshold and the Step 2 100,000 tpy CO 2 

### e threshold achieving a reasonable balance

. For more inform ation on the process used to determine the appropriate thresholds/significance levels for Steps 1 and 2 of the phase

- in period ,

### 33

see Attachment B. There are a number of uncertainties involved in the determination of the baseline and regulatory

alternative affected sources. These threshold analysis uncertainties are discussed in Section 8 of the RIA.

### 34 Section 3 Benefits (Regulatory Relief or Avoided Permit Burden Costs ) EPA estimated the regulatory relief or avoided title V and PSD permitting costs for smal l sources of GHG that will be postponed as a result of this rulemaking

. This anal ys is focuses on the burdens that are being lifted for smaller sources as a result of this rule

. In addition, an accounting of the avoided costs to S tate, local, and tribal p ermitting authorities is provided

. These avoided costs relate specifically to information collection costs or burden costs for sources of GHG emissions that would have been required to obtain an operating permit under title V or required to modify

an exis ting permit to address GHG if not for this rule

. Avoided c osts shown also include information collection requirements for additional PSD permits required for new or modifying sources of GHG , as well as the costs to S tate, local , and tribal permitting auth orities for extending their existing permitting programs to include sources of GHG
. These avoided costs do not include the cost of modifying and new source compliance with BACT because of the lack of available data. Within this benefits section of the RIA we are providing an illustrative monetary estimate of statutory

permitting requirements to show the magnitude of the savings that hy pothetically

result from this rulemaking. While we believe it is impossible to implement these permit requirements b y J anuary 2, 2011 for the reasons laid out in the preamble, it is useful to understand the scale of what the burden may have been. For sake of simplicity , we refer to this illustrative monetary

estimate as the monetized benefits of the regulatory relief presented b y this rulemaking or regulatory relief benefits for brevity. T ime and costs associated with permit activities are derived from existing Information Collection Request ( IC R) EPA documents for title V and PSD as described below

. Significant uncertainties exist in the following estimates because of the lack of historical record and permitting experience on which to base resource needs to consider sources of GHG emissions in permitting and are discussed more full y in Section 8 of this RIA. 3.1 Avoided Bu rden Costs for Title V Under Step 1 of the phase

- in , m ajor sources of GHG that would otherwise be required to obtain an operating permit due to emissions of non

- GHG pollutants are required to include GHG in permit requests. During this period, s ources oth er than those obtaining permits for non

- GHG pollutants wi ll experien ce regulatory relief. Under Step 2 , sources below 100,000 tpy CO 2 

### e PTE will experience regulatory relief , while sources above this threshold will be required to obtain

### 35

operating permits

. T able 3

. 0 shows the estimated annual permitting cost or burden cost avoided for source s subject to title V experiencing regulatory relief during the period January 2, 2011 , through June 30, 2013 , as well as for two other regulatory alternatives

. The alt ernatives shown are a threshold of 50,000 tpy CO 2 

### e PTE (the minimum threshold for a possible Step 3 ) and 25,000 tpy

CO 2 

### e PTE (the proposal threshold level). Estimates shown are the annual portion of regulatory

relief expected to occur for small GHG sources and permitting authorities due to this final rule and equate to regulatory relief for approximately

2 million title V sources. As shown on Table 3.0, the cost for a new industrial source to obtain an operating permit for GHG is $46 ,350 per permit. Over 71,000 industrial sources are likel y to benefit from this rule because of the postponement of permitting requirements under Steps 1 and 2 of the phase

- in period annuall y. Approximately 61,836 industrial sources annually will be allowed to postpone permi t revisions for GHG at an avoided cost of $1,677 per permit revision under the ‘any way ’ threshold Step 1. The estimate of industrial sources avoiding permit revisions becomes 60,921 annually under Step 2, the less than 100,000 tpy CO 2 

### e threshold. The burden cost to obtain a new commercial or multifamily residential operating permit is approximately $ 23,175 per permit with about 2.0 million of these sources annuall y benefiting from this rule by avoiding these costs for the phase

- in period. The total regulatory relief or benefits for smaller sources of GHG amount to approximately $49.5 billion per year under Steps 1 and 2 of the phase

- in period. Avoided costs for sources at regulatory alternative threshold levels of 50,000 tpy and 25,000 tp y CO 2 

### e are also presented in Table 3.0. All benefits estimates shown in this report are in 2007$. State, local , and tribal permitting authorities will also benefit from this rule by avoiding the administrative burden of processing over 2 million title V operating permits for small industrial, commercial, and residential sources of GHG annuall y. Avoided permitting cost estimates for permitting authorities and sources are calculated based on information obtained from the April 2007 Information Collection Request for State Operating Permit Regulations 4 

### Annual values are derived from Tables 7 and 8 of this document

. For consistency , the permitting authority labor costs are updated to 2007 dollars u s ing the 2007 General Schedule Salary Table from the Office of Personnel Manag ement. For the purposes of this analysis, we assume that

4 Information Collection Request for State Operating Permit Regulations (Renewal), EPA ICR Number 1587.07, OMB Control Number 2060

- 0243, 2007
.36 

### Table 3 . 0 . Annual Title V Regulatory Relief (Avoided Cost) Estimates for Affected Sources of GHG and Permitting

Authorities at Alternative Thresholds 1,2 ,3

Activity Cost per Permit (2007$) Regul atory Alternative

25,000 CO 2 e tpy Regulatory Alternative 50,000 CO 2 e tpy Final Rule : Step 2 100,000 CO 2 e tpy Final Rule : Step 1 Anyway Threshold Number of Permits Avoided

Costs (millions 2007$) Number

of Permits Avoided

Costs (millions 2007$) Number of

Permits Avoided

Costs (millions 2007$) Number

of Permits Avoided

Costs (millions 2007$) Sources New Industrial $46,350 69,726 $3,231.8 70,848 $3,283.8 71, 657 $ 3,321.3 71,829 $3,329.3 New Commercial/Residential $23,175 1,985,504 $46,014 .1 1,985,740 $46,019.5 1,985,930 $46,023.9 1,985,948 $46,024.3 Permit Revisions due to GHG $1,677 52,639 $88.3 59,930 $100.5 60,921 $102.2 61,836 $103.7 Source Total 2,107,869 $49,334.1 2,116,518 $49,403.8 2,118,508 $49,4 47.4 2,119,613 $49,457.3 Permitting Authority New Industrial $19,6 8 8 69,726 $1,372. 8 70,848 $1,394. 9 71, 657 $1,410. 8 71,829 $1,4 14.2 New Commercial/Residential $9,8 44 1,985,504 $19,5 45.3 1,985,740 $19,5 47.6 1,985,930 $19,5 49.5 1,985,948 $19,5 4 9.7 Permit Revisions due to GHG $1,840 52,639 $96.9 59,930 $110.3 60,921 $112.1 61,836 $113.8 Permitting Authority Total 2,107,869 $21,0 14.9 2,116,518 $21,0 52.8 2,118,508 $21,0 72.4 2,119,613 $21,0 7 7. 6 Total Title V Regulatory Relief $70,3 49 $70,4 5 6.6 $70,5 19.8 $70,5 34.9 Percentage of Emissions Covered 3 3% 8% 11% 13% Sums may not add due to rounding. 1 Avoided c osts shown represent the annual estimates of the regulatory burden relief from this rule and for regulatory alternatives for over 2 million sources of GHGs (about 1/3 of the total number of title V sources expected to obtain regulatory relief ) . See Appendix B and C for more details. Sources experiencing regulatory relief are those with the potential to emit less than the threshold levels annually. 2 These estimates are explained in more detail in Attachment C “ Summary of Methodology and Data Used to Estimate Burden Relief and Evaluate Resource Requirement s at Alternative Greenhouse Gas Permitting Thresholds

. ” 3 Percentage of emiss ions covered represent s estimated actual emissions from sources expected to experience regulatory relief as a percentage of total stationary source GHG emissions.

### 37

c ommercial/residential sources that exceed the major source threshold due to GHG emissions will not likely

have as substantial applicable permitting cost requirements as industrial sources. We assumed that p ermits for such sources will require only one half the time to prepare and issue as those for industrial sources, which have applicable re quirements in addition to GHG. Therefore, it is estimated that new commercial/residential permits require 5 0 percent of the time needed for new industrial permits, or 214 hours compared to 428 hours for permitting authorities. For significant revisions and permit renewals, it is assumed that inco rporating GHG information adds 40 hours, or an additional 10 percent to the current updating and processing time. For more information on the methods used to calculate permit processing costs for permitting authorities for title V permitting, see Attachment C , “ Summary of Methodology

and Data Used to Estimate Burden Relief and Evaluate Resource Requirements at Alternative Greenhouse Gas Permitting Thresholds

. ” The cost savings for permitting authorities relating to title V are summarized in Table 3

. 0 and are estimated to exceed $ 21 billion annually

. Costs avoided annually for permitting authorities at alternative threshold levels other than Steps 1 and 2 are also shown on Table 3

. 0
. This rule specifies a phased

- in step approach to establish title V and PSD thresholds. For this reason, it is appropriate to assess the regulatory relief during the various steps of the phase

- in period in addition to looking at regulatory relief on an annual basis as previously discusse d

. Since thresholds for onl y Steps 1 and 2 are promulgated in this rulemaking with a potential Step 3 to be considered onl y after subsequent rulemaking, we calculate the regulatory relief possible for a two and one

- half ye ar period, the approximate time p eriod covered b y Steps 1 and 2 of this tailoring rule. Considering the regulatory relief for the 2 .5 year period allows us to evaluate alternative regulatory relief based not onl y on threshold levels, but also based upon the timing of the steps of the pha se - in period . Table 3

- 1 presents the Steps 1 and 2 regulatory relief for title V based upon alternative regulatory thresholds and the timing of the phase

- in steps. Alternatives of 25,000 tpy

CO 2 

### e, 50,000 tpy

CO 2 

### e, 100,000 tpy

CO 2 

### e, and the ‘anyw ay ’ thres holds are evaluated as if they were implemented for the entire Step 1 and 2 period. The 25,000 tpy CO 2 

### e and the ‘anyway’ threshold regulatory relief shown represent the bounding estimates for regulatory relief for these threshold alternatives as well as alternative timings of the steps

. If the 25,000 tpy CO 2 

### e threshold were imposed for Steps 1 and 2 of the phase

- in, regulatory relief or avoided title V permitting costs for sources and permitting authorities would amount to approximately $ 175.9

### 38

b illion for a Steps 1 and 2 phase

- in period . Alternatively if the ‘anyw ay ’ based threshold were imposed for a 2 .5 ye ar period, the regulatory relief would be $ 176.3 billion for sources and permitting authorities during the first two steps of the phase

- in period. The final tailoring rule promulgated, establishes the ‘anyway’ threshold for Step 1 and 100,000 tpy CO 2 

### e threshold for Step 2. The total regulatory relief for the final rule for the 2 .5 ye ar period for title V is estimated to be $ 176.3 b illion. Altering S tep 2 to be 25,000 tpy CO 2 

### e and 50,000 tp y CO 2 

### e with Step 1 as the ‘anyway’ threshold would result regulatory relief estimates for the three year period of $ 17 6 b illion and $ 176. 2 b illion , respectivel y. 3 . 2 Avoided Information Collection Costs Associated with the PSD Program This rulemaking limits the new sources requiring PSD permits for Step 1 to those that would be required to comply with PSD for non

- GHG emissions . For modifying sources , the significance level requiring permits is 75,000 or greater tp y CO 2 

### e PTE
. In Step 2 of the phase

- in period, the threshold becomes 100,000 tpy CO 2 

### e PTE or greater for new sources and the significance level for modifying sources remains at 75,000 or greater tpy CO 2 

### e . Table 3

. 2 summarizes the estimated benefits to small GHG sources resulting from this final rule. Annual regulatory

relief for Steps 1 and 2 of the phase

- in period, as well as additional alternative regulatory

thresholds , are depicted on Table 3

. 2 . The estimated annual burden or permit

- related costs avoi ded b y small GHG sources amount to around $ 5.5 b illion annually during Step 1 and $5 .4 b illion during Step 2 with the burden costs per permit expected to be $ 131 thousand for new sources, $84.5 thousand for modified industrial sources , $ 82.3 thousand for n ew commercial or residential sources , and $59.2 thousand for modifying commercial and residential sources

. S tate, local , and tribal permitting authorities are expected to avoid administrative costs of $ 1.5 billion under Step 1 and $1 , 485 million under Step 2 annually

. Burden estimates for the PSD program permitting authorities are calculated based on listed values obtained from Tables 6

- 1 and 6

- 2 on pages 18
- 19 in the Information Collection Request for Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Nonattainment New Source Review39 

### Table 3 - 1. Step s 1 and 2 Title V Regulatory Relief (Avoided Cost) Es timates for Affected Sources of GHG and Permitting

Authorities at Alternative Thresholds 1,2 Regulatory Relief Estim ates for Step 1 and 2 of the Phase - In Period (January 2, 2011 through July 1, 2013) Activity Regulatory Alternatives (Avoided Permitting Costs in million 2007$) Sources 25,000 CO2e tpy 50,000 CO2e tpy 1 00,000 CO2e tpy Anyway Threshold Anyway/ 50 ,000 Anyway/25 ,000 

### Final Rule Anyway/ 1 00 ,000 New Industrial $8,079.5 $8,209.5 $8,303.3 $8,323.3 $8,232.3 $8,128.3 $8,307.3 New Commercial/Residential $115,035.3 $115,048.8 $115,059.8 $115,060.8 $115,051.2 $115,0 40.4 $115,060.0 Permit revisions due to GHG $220.8 $251.3 $255.5 $259.3 $252.9 $228.5 $256.3 Source Total $123,335.5 $123,509.5 $123,618.5 $123,643.3 $123,536.3 $123,397.1 $123,623.5 Permitting Authority New Industrial $3,431.9 $3,487.2 $ 3,527 $3,535.4 $3,496.8 $3,452.6 $3,528.7 New Commercial/Residential $48,863.3 $48,869.1 $48,873.7.0 $48,874.2 $48,870.1 $48,865.4 $48,873.8 Permit revisions due to GHG $242.1 $275.7 $280.2 $284.5 $277.4 $250.6 $281.1 Permitting Authority Total $52,537. 3 $52,632 $52,680.9 $52,694.1 $52,644.3 $52,568.6 $52,683.6 Total Title V Regulatory Relief $175,872.8 $176,141.5 $176,299.4 $176,337 .5 $176,180.6 $175,965.7 $176,307.1 Benefits represent regulatory relief or avoided costs for sources with the potential to emit below the thresholds shown. 1 Avoided c osts shown represent the 21⁄2 year estimates of th e regulatory burden relief from this rule and for regulatory alternatives for Steps 1 and 2 for the period Jan. 2, 2011 through July 1, 2013. Alternatives 25,000 CO2e tpy, 50,000 CO2e tpy, 100,000 CO2e tpy, and non

- GHG based assume these thresholds remain in effe ct for entire 21⁄2 years. Alternatives Anyway/50,000 and Anyway/25,000 assume the Anyway threshold for Step 1 and 50,000 CO2e tpy and 25,000 CO2e tpy thresholds for Step 2, respectively. Finally the final rule estimates shown in the last column of the tabl e assume the Anyway threshold for Step 1 (one half year) and the 100,000 CO2e tpy threshold for Step 2 (two years). Sums may not add due to rounding. 2 These estimates are explained in more detail in Attachment C “ Summary of Methodology and Data Used to Estimate Burden Relief and Evaluate Resource Requirements at Alternative Greenhouse Gas Permitting Thresholds

. ”40 

### Table 3 . 2 . Annual PSD Regulatory Relief (Avoided Costs ) for Sources of GHG and Permitting Authorities at Alternative

Thresholds 1,2

Activity Cost per Permit (2007 $) Regulatory Alternative

25,000 CO 2 e tpy Regulatory Alternative 50,000 CO 2 e tpy Step 2 100,000 CO 2 e tpy Threshold, 75,000 CO 2 e tpy Significance Level Step 1 Anyway 75,000 CO 2 e tpy Significance Level
Number of Permits Avoided

Costs (millions 2007$) N umber

of Permits Avoided

Costs (millions 2007$) Number

of Permits Avoided

Costs (millions 2007$) Number

of Permits Avoided

Costs (millions 2007$) Sources New Industrial $84,530 16,892 $1,427.9 24,183 $2,044.2 25 , 174 $2,128.0 26,089 $2,2 05.3 New Commercial/Residential $59,152 55,446 $3,279.7 55,481 $3,281.8 55 , 505 $3,283.2 55,509 $3,283.5 Source Total 72,338 $4,707.6 79,664 $5,326.0 80 , 679 $5,411.2 81,598 $5,488.8 Permitting Authority New Industrial $23,243 16,892 $392.6 24,183 $562.1 25 , 174 $585.1 26,089 $606.4 New Commercial/Residential $16,216 55,446 $899.1 55,481 $899.7 55 , 505 $900.1 55,509 $900.1 Permitting Authority Total 72,338 $1,291.7 79,664 $1,461.8 80 , 679 $1,485.2 81,598 $1,506.5
Total PSD Regulatory Relief $5,999.4 $6,787.8 $6,896.4 $6,995.3 1 Avoided costs shown represent annual estimates of the regulatory burden relief for this rule and for regulatory alternatives for sources with the potential to emit below the thre shold

. Sums may not add due to rounding. 2 Attachment C : “ Summary of Methodology and Data Used to Estimate Burden Relief and Evaluate Resource Requirements at Alternative Greenhouse G as Permitting Thresholds

### 41

August 2008. 5 

### As shown in Table 3.2, State, local, and tribal permitting authorities are estimated to expend $23,243 per permit to process a new GHG industrial PSD permit and $16,216 per permit for a new commercial or residential PSD permit. Itis assumed that permit preparation and issuance for c ommercial/residential permits require less time to prepare and issue than industrial source permits since commercial/residential sources would likely be somewhat less complex in terms of numbers and types of emission sources and control requirements. Estim ates obtained are additional burden and costs to those currentl y experienced by permitting authorities and sources. For more information on the estimates of burden costs for PSD permits, see Attachment C. Avoided costs estimates for regulatory alternativ es of 25,000 tpy (proposal level) and 50,000tpy CO 2 

### e PTE are also shown in Table 3. 2 . The PSD estimated costs on Table 3.2 represent annual estimates of costs avoided for sources and permitting authorities. Regulatory

relief alternatives for Steps 1 and 2 for PSD are shown on Table 3.3. Evaluating regulatory

alternatives for the approximate 2 .5 ye ar time period covered b y Steps 1 and 2 provides comparisons of the threshold levels and the impacts of timing choices for the steps. As shown on Table 3.3, re gulatory alternatives of 25,000 tpy CO 2 

### e, 50,000 tpy

CO 2 

### e, 100,000 tpy

CO 2 

### e, and the ‘anyw ay ’ thresholds are evaluated as if they were implemented for the entire two step phase

- in period. The 25,000 tpy CO 2 

### e and the ‘anyw ay ’ thresholds represent the bounding alternatives over the period with the 25,000 tpy CO 2 

### e alternative providing the least regulatory

relief and the ‘anyway’ threshold the greatest. If the 25,000 tpy CO 2 

### e were implemented for Steps 1 and 2, the regulatory relief for PSD sources would amo unt to approximately

$ 14,998.3 million during the Step s 1 and 2 phase

- in period. This regulatory relief would be $ 17,488.3 million over the same period with the ‘anyway’ threshold. All other alternatives shown and combinations of regulatory alternatives within the 2.5 year time frame lie within the 2 5,000 tpy

CO 2 

### e threshold and the ‘anyway’ threshold. The final rule ‘anyw ay ’ threshold for Step 1 and 100,000 tpy CO 2 

### e threshold for Step 2 results in PSD regulatory relief of $ 17,290.5 million for the 2.5 ye ar phase

- in period. This rule also alleviates the regulatory burden associated with compl ying with PSD BACT requirements for small new and modifying sources

. The BACT costs foregone are not

5 Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Non

- Attainment Area New Source Review (Renewal), EPA ICR Number 123.23, OMB Control Number 2060

- 0003, 2008.

### 42

estimated or shown in Table s 3. 2 or 3.3 because of the significant uncertainties involved in these requirements for affected sources and lack of sufficient information to estimate these costs currentl y. Likewise, the foregone emission reductions associated with these BACT requirements for small sources are not estimated . This issue is discussed further in Section 4 of this RIA. The benefits estimates for this rule are subject to limitations and uncertainties that are discussed in Section 8 of this RIA. Table 3.4 presents the title V and PSD regulatory relief for the f

ull phase

- in period of approximately

five ye ars. The final rule benefits are shown for two alternatives for Step 3, one in which Step 3 remains at the Step 2 level and one in which Step 3 becomes the minimum threshold of at least 50,000 tpy CO 2 

### e previousl y discussed. These alternatives for Step 3 bound the net benefit estimates for the entire phase in period. If Step 3 remains at the Step 2 level, net benefits for the five ye ar period are $387,1 53.4 +B million. This b enefit estimate becomes $386, 7 24.1 +

B million if Step 3 becomes the minimum level of 50,000 tpy for the five ye ar phase

- in period. The letter B represents the benefits we are not able to quantify in this anal ys is and are discussed in section 8 of this report. Given the short time frame of th e impact of this final rule, we did not consider the time value of money or discount the benefit and cost estimates provided in this report, rather we assume these benefit and cost estimates are occurring currentl y. All benefit dollar estimates shown are based upon 2007$.

### 43

T able 3.3 Step 1 and 2 PSD Regulatory Relief (Avoided Costs ) for Sources of GHG and Permitting Authorities at Alternative Thresholds 1,2 Regulatory Relief for Step 1 and 2 Phase - in Period ( January 2, 2011 through July 1, 2013) Regulatory Alternatives (Avoided Permitting Costs in millions 2007$) 25,000 CO2e tpy 50,000 CO2e tpy 100,000 CO2e tpy Anyway Threshold Anyway/50 ,000 Anyway/25 ,000 

### Final Rule Anyway/ 100 ,000 Activity Sources New Industrial $3,569.8 $5, 110.5 $5,320.0 $5,513.3 $5,191.1 $3,958.5 $5,358.7 New Commercial/Residential $8,199.3 $8,204.5 $8,208.0 $8,208.8 $8,205.4 $8,201.2 $8,208.2 Source Total $11,769.0 $13,315.0 $13,528.0 $13,722.0 $13,396.4 $12,159.6 $13,566.8 Permittin g Authority New Industrial $981.5 $1,405.3 $1,462.8 $1,516.0 $1,427.4 $1,088.4 $1,473.4 New Commercial/Residential $2,247.8 $2,249.3 $2,250.3 $2,250.3 $2,249.5 $2,248.3 $2,250.3 Permitting Authority Total $3,229.3 $3,654.5 $3,713 .0 $3,766.3 $3,676.9 $3,336.7 $3,723.7 Total PSD Regulatory Relief $14,998.3 $16,969.5 $17,241.0 $17,488.3 $17,073.3 $15,496.3 $17,290.5 Benefits are regulatory relief or avoided costs for sources with the potential to emit below the thresholds shown. 1 Avoided c osts shown represent the 21⁄2 year estimates of the regulatory burden relief from this rule and for regulatory alternatives for Steps 1 and 2 of the phase in period January 2, 2011 through July 1, 2013 . Alternatives 25,000 C O2e tpy, 50,000 CO2e tpy, 100,000 CO2e tpy, and ‘anyway’ assume these thresholds remain in effect for 21⁄2 years. Alternatives Anyway /50 ,000 and Anyway/25 ,000 assume the Anyway threshold for Step 1 and 50,000 CO2e tpy and 25,000 CO2e tpy thresholds for Step 2, respectively. Finally the final rule estimates shown in the last column of the table show the Anyway threshold for Step 1 (one half year) , and the 100,000 CO2e tpy threshold for Step 2 (two years). Sums may not add due to rounding. 2 Attachment C: “ Summary of Methodology and Data Used to Estimate Burden Relief and Evaluate Resource Requirements at Alternative Greenhouse G as Permitting Thresholds .”

### 44

Table 3.4 Benefits of the Final Rule and Step 3 Regulatory Alternatives

Benefits for the Five Y ear Period Beginning January 2, 2011 Regulatory Alternative (millions 2007$) Final Rule + Possible Step 3 of 100, 000 tpy CO2e 3 50, 000 tpy CO2e 4 Benefits - Regulatory Relief Sources Title V 1 $247,253.6 $247,145.3 PSD 2 $27,094.7 $2 6,881.8 Total Source Regulatory Relief $274,348.3 $274,027.1 Permitting Authority Title V 1 $105,3 68.5 $105,318.8 PSD 2 $7,436.61 $7,378.1 Total Permitting Authority $112, 805.1 $112,696.8 Total Regulatory Relief $387, 153.4 +B $386,7 24.1 +B Benefits are regulatory relief for sources with the potential to emit below the thresholds shown. B
- unquantified benefits of the rule include regulatory relief from BACT requirements for PSD sources 1Reflects estimates of regulatory relief or avoided permit burden costs for title V GHG sources and permitting authorities. 2 Shows estimates of regulatory relief or avoided permit burden costs for GHG PSD sources and permitting authorities. 3 Includes 1⁄2 year of Step 1 (anyway threshold), 4 1⁄2 years of Step 2 (100,000 threshold), 4 Includes 1⁄2 ye ar of Step 1 (anyway threshold), 2 years of Step 2 (100,000 threshold), and 2 1⁄2 years of Step 3 alternative of 50,000.

### 45 S ection 4 Social Costs EPA examined the social costs of this final rule. For this rule, the soci al costs represent the foregone environmental benefits that would occur if regulatory relief was not offered to small sources of GHG emissions. This action is one of regulatory relief since it increases the emissions thresholds for the title V and PSD programs, as they appl y to sources of GHG , to levels above those in the CAA. Previous sections have discussed the avoided cost of such relief, but there is also a social cost imposed by such relief because this rule may forego some of the possible benefits as sociated with title V and PSD programs for sources of GHG emissions below Step 1 and 2 phase

- in thresholds but above the statutory 100/250 tpy

levels . These benefits are those attributed to title V and PSD permitting programs in general. These benefits are based on the relevance of these programs to policy making, transparency

issues, and market efficiency and , therefore , are very

difficult to quantify

and monetize. For title V, they include the benefits of improved compliance with CAA requirements that s tem from (1) improved clarity regarding applicability

of requirements ; (2) discovery and required correction of noncompliance prior to receiving a permit ; (3) improving monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting concerning compliance status ; (4) self

- certifi cation of compliance with applicable requirements initially and annually , and prompt reporting of deviations from permit requirements ; (5) enhanced opportunity

for the public to understand and monitor sources ’ compliance obligations ; and (6) improved ability

of EPA, permitting authorities, and the publi c to enforce CAA requirements. However, it is important to remember that a title V permit does not add new requirements for pollution control itself but rather collects all of a facility’s applicable requirem ents under the CAA in one permit. Therefore, the compliance benefits above are less when title V permits contain few or no CAA applicable requirements. During the first two steps of this phase

- in period, we expect that the vast majority of sources excluded from title V would be sources that have no CAA applicable requirements for GHG emissions and few or no requirements for other pollutants because their emissions of those pollutants are so small. For this reason, although it is extremely difficult to me asure the degree of improved compliance, if any, that would be foregone or to quantify

the social costs that would be imposed , we expect that they would be negligible.

### 46

For PSD, the primary social cost imposed by the tailoring rule stems from the foregone b enefit o f appl ying BACT to the tens of thousands of small new sources and modifications that will be below our thresholds during the first phase. This social cost potentially weighs against the cost savings described above that stem (in part) from avoidin g the administrative and control costs of appl ying BACT to these sources. The BACT requirement en sures that when new and modified sources increase their emissions they are using state

- of

- the

- art emission controls and afford the public an opportunity to co mment on the control decision. It does not prohibit increases , but it en sures that such controls are applied . Delaying the BACT requirement for numerous small sources during the first phase of this rule could allow increases from these smaller sources th at are greater than they would be if BACT were applied. A detailed analysis of this difference is beyond the scope of this rule because we do not have detailed information on the universe of these tens of thousands of small PSD actions, the candidate BACT technologies for each of them, how permitting authorities would make the BACT decisions, and how the BACT limit would compare to what would otherwise be installed absent BACT. Below we present an illustrative example of how BACT impacts might be determined for sources that would be excluded from review under the tailoring rule. This example illustrates the difficulty in quantifying the social costs of avoided BACT but helps explain the nature of such costs. To assess the effect of avoided BACT, we would identify the universe of source types that are affected b y the tailoring rule. More specifically, we would have to project the number of various source typ es (within those affected b y the tailoring rule) that would actuall y be constructing or modifying. W e have generall y characterized these sources as part of the tailoring rule threshold evaluation and have determined a large proportion of these to consist of small commercial and residential sources. This determination was based on rough energy usage data , but to assess BACT, we would require more specific information about the proposed equipment that will actually

be emitting GHG (e.g., water heaters, furnaces, cooking equipment, dryers) , and more specific characterization would be subject to a very high degree of uncertainty

. Following characterization of new and modified sources, we would need to determine, for each category

of source, what GHG control technologies are available for such equipment. For commercial sources, we may have to determine commercial availability of a range of lower emitting processes, more efficient technologies, and other techniq u es for improving energy efficiency . Next, we would assess affected sources ’ capital and operating costs of control

### 47

options and determine energy and environmental impacts. Finall y, we would need to appl y judgment (as the permitting authority would do in each case) to select the technology that represented the maximum degree of control taking the costs, energy , and environmental impacts into account. The social cost component of the impact of foregoing BACT for sources that construct or modify during the first phase would be represented by the difference between the increased emissions that would result from such sources absent BACT and the increase that would be allowed under the BACT requirement. However, although we can point to the existence of such differences, we cannot quantify them (though as explained below we expect that overall they will be very limited in scope and magnitude). Since there has been no regulatory experience with controlling GHG emissions from these sources, and limited permitting experience of any kind with mandatory

control requirements on smaller commercial and residential sources, we are not in a position at this point to identify the specific control technologies and quantify this difference to estimate the greater increases that might occur in the absence of appl ying the BACT process to these sources across the country . In addition, since the PSD BACT review and selection p rocess is implemented on a case

-by

- case basis, there is additional uncertainty in predicting program

wide reductions because even for similar sources, permitting authorities may ultimatel y weigh the BACT factors differently and adopt different control meas ures . For all these reasons, it is not possible at this time to quantify the social costs of avoided BACT. However, we note that the universe of possible emissions that would be regulated by sources excluded under the tailoring rule is small compared to those that would remain subject to PSD. The sources excluded in the first steps of this phased

- in rule c omprise only 11 percent of total stationary

source GHG emissions , while 68 percent remain subject to regulation

. The remaining fraction of stationary GHG source emissions come from sources below statutory CAA thresholds of 100/250 tons per year. Furthermore, we expect the emissions differences due to BACT controls for sources excluded by the tailoring rule to be relatively small because of the lack of available cost

- effective capture and control technologies for GHG at such sources that are akin to those that exist for conventional pollutants and large sources, as well as the likelihood that even in the absence of BACT such sources would already be installing relativel y efficient GHG technologies to save on fuel costs. Thus, although potential benefits would be foregone by excluding smaller sources from the permitting programs, these benefits are likely to be small

.

### 4 8

Under the tailoring rule, we will wor k during the 6

- ye ar period to greatly improve our understanding of both the administrative costs of regulating and the social costs of not regulating smaller sources under PSD and title V, and we will rely on that information to support our future threshol d anal ys es called for under the rule. Since EPA is unable to quantify these GHG emission reductions foregone at this time because of these uncertainties involved in this estimation, it is also not possible to provide a monetized estimate of the foregone benefits or social costs of this rule. If such emission reductions foregone were quantified, EPA could use the social cost of carbon benefit estimates such as those used in the “Rulemaking to Establish Light Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards” 6 

### recently published to compute the dollar value associated with the social costs of this rule. Nonetheless, we expect that the value would be small because, as discussed above, the emissions differences from which this value would be computed are small. In reaching the decisions for this GHG tailoring rule, EPA recognizes the GHG emissions can remain in the atmosphere for decades to centuries, meaning that their concentrations become well mixed throughout the global atmosphere regardless of emission origin, and their effects on climate are long lasting and significant. A detailed explanation of climate change and its impact on health, society, and the environment is included in EPA ’ s technical support document for the endangerment finding (Docket ID No. EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2009
- 0171). EPA recognizes the importance of reducing climate change emissions for all sources of GHG emissions , including those sources afforded regulatory relief in this rule , and plans to address p otential emission reductions from these small sources using voluntary and energy

efficiency

approaches. Elsewhere, we have discussed EPA ’ s interest in continuing to use regulatory and/or nonregulatory

tools for reducing emissions from smaller GHG sources because we believe that these tools will likely

result in more efficient and cost

- effective regulation than would case

-by

case permitting.

6 U.S. EPA 2010. Rulemaking to Establish Light Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards. EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2009
- 0472. http://www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/regulations/ghg

-pream ble

- regs.pdf

.

### 49 Section 5 Net Benefits The net benefits of this GHG tailoring rule represent the difference between the benefits and costs of this rule to society . This section presents the net benefits of the final rule and other regulatory

alternatives. As discussed in Section 3, this rule is one of regulatory relief and the benefits to society are estimates the regulatory relie f (avoided permit burden costs) to sources and permitting authorities for Steps 1 and 2 of the phase

- in period. Within this RIA we are providing an illustrative monetary estimate of statutory

permitting requirements to show the magnitude of the savings th at hy pothetically

result from this rulemaking. While we believe it is impossible to implement these permit requirements by January 2, 2011 for the reasons laid out in the preamble, it is useful to understand the scale of what the burden may have been. F or sake of simplicity, we refer to this illustrative monetary estimate as the monetized benefits of the regulatory

relief presented by

this rulemaking or regulatory relief benefits for brevity. The social costs of the rule are the foregone environmental benefits in the form of potential GHG emission reductions that could occur during the phase

- in period and are discussed in Section 4. This rulemaking provides regulatory relief for a phase

- in period of approximately 5 years to smaller sources of GHG by pha sing in the statutory

permitting threshold at levels above statutory requirements. This final rule establishes thresholds and PSD significance levels for Steps 1 and 2 of the phase

- in period (the 2 .5 ye ar period between January 2, 2011 and July

1, 2013), commits to considering a further Step 3, and indicates floor title V and PSD threshold levels from July

1, 2013 through April 30, 2016. While the EPA commits to undertake a rulemaking for a further Step 3, the ultimate outcome for sources of GHG from thi s additional rulemaking is unknown at this time. Annual estimates for the final rule Steps 1 and 2 and regulatory alter natives are presented in Table 5 .1. As Table 5 .1 indicates, the annual net benefits associated with the final rule Step 1 are $ 77,530. 2 million +

B

- C and for Step 2 are $ 77,416 .2 + B

- C million annually , where B denotes the unquantified benefits and C the quantified costs of this final rule. These unquantified benefits and costs are discussed in more detail in the l imitations and uncertainties S ection 8 of this report . Table 5 .2 shows the final rule Steps 1 and 2 with regulatory alternatives for the two and one

- half year phase

- in period January 2, 2011 through July

1, 2013. The net benefits of the final rule for Steps 1 and 2 are $193,5 9 7 .5 + B

- C million for the two and one

- half year period.

### 50

Finally , Table 5 .3 presents the final rule net benefits with two alternatives for Step 3, one in which Step 3 remains at the Step 2 level of 100, 000 tpy CO 2 

### e and one in which Step 3 becomes the minimum threshold of at least 50,000 tp y CO2e previousl y discussed. These alternatives for Step 3 bound the net benefit estimates for the entire phase in period. If Step 3 remains at the Step 2 level, net benefits for the five ye ar period are $387,1 53.4 +B

- C mi llion. This net benefit estimate becomes $386, 7 24.1 + B

- C million if Step 3 becomes the minimum level of 50,000 tpy CO 2 

### e threshold for the five year phase

- in period. Given the short time frame of the impact of this final rule, we did not consider the time value of money or discount the benefit and cost estimates provided in this report, rather we assume these benefit and cost estimates are occurring currentl y. All dollar estimates shown are based upon 2007$. Table 5.1 Annual Net Benefits for GHG Tailori ng Rule Regulatory Alternatives Annual Benefits and Costs for Regulatory Alternatives (millions of 2007$) 3 Final Rule Step 1 Final Rule Step 2 Anyway 100,000 tpy CO2e 50,000 tpy CO2e 25,000 tpy CO2e Benefits - Regulatory Relief Sources Title V 1 $49,457.3 $49,447.4 $49,403.8 $49,334.2 PSD 2 $5,488.8 $5,411.2 $5,326.0 $4,707.6 Total Source Regulatory Relief $54,946.1 $54,858.6 $54,729.8 $54,041.8 Permitting Authority Title V 1 $21,0 7 7. 6 $21,0 72.4 $21,0 52.8 $21, 0 1 4. 9 PSD 2 $1,506.5 $1,485.2 $1,461.8 $1,291.7 Total Permitting Authority $22,5 84
. 1 $22, 557.6 $22,5 14.6 $22, 306.6 Total Regulatory Relief $77 , 5 30. 2 +B $77,4 16.2 +B $77,2 44.4 +B $76,3 48.4 +B Costs - Foregone GHG Emission Reductions Title V & PSD C C C C Net Benefits 3 $77 , 5 30. 2 +B - C $77, 416.2 +B - C $77,2 44.4 +B - C $76,3 48.4 +B - C Benefits are regulatory relief or avoided permit costs for sources with the annual potential to emit less than the threshold shown. B
- unquantifie d benefits of the rule include regulatory relief from BACT requirements for PSD sources C
- unquantified social costs of tailoring rule represents economic value of foregone environmental benefits (possible GHG emission reductions) during Step 1 and 2 of the phase in period. Potential foregone GHG emission reductions during the phase

- in period are not known at this time. See Section 4 of the RIA for a qualitative discussion of the social costs of the rule. 1Reflects estimates of regulatory relief or avoi ded permit burden costs for title V GHG sources and permitting authorities. 2 Shows estimates of regulatory relief or avoided permit burden costs for GHG PSD sources and permitting authorities. 3 Totals may not sum due to rounding.

### 51

Table 5. 2 . Net Benefits of the Final GHG Tailoring Rule and Regulatory Alternatives
Step 1 and 2 Phase - In Period (January 2, 2011 - July 1, 2013) Regulatory Alternatives (millions of 2007$) Anyway 3 100,000 tpy

CO2e 3 50,000 tpy

CO2e 3 25,000 tpy

CO2e 3 Anyway/50 ,000 4 Anyway/25 ,000 5 Final Rule 6 Benefits - Regulatory Relief Sources Title V 1 $123,643.3 $123,618.5 $123,509.5 $123,335.5 $123,536.3 $123,397.1 $123,623.5 PSD 2 $13,722.0 $13,528.0 $13,315.0 $11,769.0 $13,396.4 $12,159.6 $13,566.8 Total Source Regulatory Relief $137,365.3 $137,146.5 $136,824.5 $135,104.5 $ 136,932 .8 $135,556. 6 $137,190.3 Permitting Authority Title V 1 $52, 694.1 $5 2,681 $52, 631.9 $52,5 37.3 $52, 6 44.3 $5 2,56 8.7 $52, 6 83.6 PSD 2 $3,766.3 $3,713.0 $3,654.5 $3,229.3 $3,676. 8 $3,336.7 $3,723. 6 Total Permitting Authority $56,4 60.4 $56 , 393.9 $56, 286.3 $55, 766.7 $56, 3 21.1 $55, 90 5.4 $56, 40 7.2 Total Regulatory Relief $193, 825.6 +B $193 ,540.4 +B $193, 110.9 +B $190,8 71.1 +B $193,2 53.9 +B $191,4 62.0 +B $193, 5 9 7.5 +B Costs - Foregone GHG Emission Reductions Title V & PSD C C C C C C C Net Benefits $193, 825.6 +B- C $193,5 40.4 +B- C $193, 110.9 + B- C $190,8 71 . 1 +

B- C $193,2 53.9 +

B- C $191,4 62.0 +

B- C $193,5 9 7.5 +

B- C Benefits represent regulatory relief for those sources with the annual potential to emit less than the threshold shown. B
- unquantified benefits of the rule include regulatory relief from BACT requirements for PSD sources C
- unquantified social costs of tailoring rule represents economic value of foregone environmental benefits (potential GHG emiss ion reductions) during Step 1 and 2 of the phase in period. Foregone GHG emission reductions are not known at this time. See Section 4 of the RIA for a qualitative discussion of the social costs of the rule. 1Reflects estimates of regulatory relief or avo ided permit burden costs for title V GHG sources and permitting authorities. 2 Shows estimates of regulatory relief or avoided permit burden costs for GHG PSD sources and permitting authorities. 3 Shows alternative as single step for the 21⁄2.year phase

- in p eriod for 'anyway', 100,000 tpy CO2e, 50,000 tpy CO2e, and 25,000 tpy CO2 e thresholds respectively. 4 Include s Step 1 for one

- half year and 50,000 tpy CO2e threshold for two years. 5 Includes Step 1 for one

- half year and 25,000 tpy CO2e threshold for two years. 6 Phase

- in period for final rule includes 1/2 year of Step 1 ‘anyway’ threshold and 2 years of Step 2 100,000 tpy CO2e threshold.

### 52

Table 5. 3 Net Benefits of the Final Rule and Step 3 Regulatory Alternatives Regulatory Alternative s (millions 2007$) Final Rule + Possible Step 3 (five year period) 100, 000 tpy CO2e 3 50, 000 tpy CO2e 4 Benefits - Regulatory Relief Sources Title V 1 $247 , 253.6 $247,14 4.1 PSD 2 $27,094.7 $26,881.8 Total Source Regulatory Relief $274,348.3 $274,02 5.9 Permitting Authority Title V 1 $105,3 68.5 $105,3 20.2 PSD 2 $7,436.61 $7,378.1 Total Permitting Authority $112, 805.1 $112,69 8.2 Total Regulatory Relief $387, 153.4 +B $386,7 24.1 +B Costs - Foregone GHG Emission Reductions Title V & PSD C C Net Benefits $387, 153.4 + B- C $ 386,7 24.1 + B- C Benefits are regulatory relief for sources with the annual potential to emit less than the thresholds sho wn. B
- unquantified benefits of the rule include regulatory relief from BACT requirements for PSD sources C
- unquantified social costs of tailoring rule represents economic value of foregone environmental benefits (potential GHG emission reductions) during Step 1, 2,and 3 of the phase in period. Foregone GHG emission reductions are not known at this time. See Section 4 of the RIA for a qualitative discussion of the social costs of the rule. 1Reflects estimates of regulatory relief or avoided permit burden costs for title V GHG sources and permitting authorities. 2 Shows estimates of regulatory relief or avoided permit burden costs for GHG PSD sources and permitting authorities. 3 Includes 1⁄2 year of Step 1 (anyway threshold), 2 years of Step 2 (100,000 threshold), and 2 1⁄2 years of Step 3 (alternative of 100,000 threshold). Covers five year period beginning January 2, 2011. 4 Includes 1⁄2 year of Step 1 (anyway threshold), 2 years of Step 2 (100,000 threshold), and 2 1⁄2 years of Step 3 (alternative of 50,000 threshold). Covers five year period beginning January 2, 201 1
.

### 53 S ection 6 Impacts of Regulatory Relief This final rulemaking does not impose economic impacts on any sources or permitting authorities but should instead be viewed as regulatory relief for smaller GHG emission sources. This RIA illustrates the burden impacts avoided as a result of this rule . The avoided impacts o f extending these programs for St ate, local, and tribal permitting authorities are also reported . To estimate the avoided economic impacts, which include small business impacts, EPA estimat ed cost - to - sales ratios by

comparing the estimated total annualized compliance cost per permit per source avoided to industry average revenues per establishment. EPA also evaluated cost

- to - sales ratios by comparing avoided burden costs to revenues of firms at different firm size categories , recognizing that the sources required to compl y with these CAA permit provisions during the phase

- in period are larger emissions sources and more likely to be large business entities. 6 . 1 Method for Analyzing Avoided Economic and Small Entity Impacts EPA used cost

- to - sales comparisons to evaluate the potential impacts to sources affected by this rule. Since this regulatory action provides regulatory relief, these cost

- to - sales ratios represent the economic impacts that are avoided or postponed for small GHG sources as a result of this rule. For all regulatory actions, EPA must determine whether a rule will have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities (SI SNOSE). This rule provides regulatory

relief to small sources and thus does not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The approach for estimating the postponed or avoided economic impacts and the small entity anal ys is are the same for this anal ys is. The steps followed include gathering data to characterize the affected entities by size, selecting and describing the measures and economic impact thresholds used in the anal ysis, and determining cost

- to - sales ratios for the affected industrial, commercial , and residential categories

. 6
. 1.1 I dentifying Affected Sectors and Entities The industrial, commercial , and residential sectors covered b y the rule were identified during the development of the cost anal ys is for the rule

. For the industrial sector, these sources are summarized with applicable NAICS codes in Table s 6
. 0 through 6
. 3 . For commercial and residential sources, the sources are lis ted in Tables 6
. 4 through 6
. 7
.

### 54

6
. 1.2 Data Used to Characterize Affecte d Entities by Size The Census Bureau ’ s Statistics of U.S. Businesses (SUSB) data provide national information on the distribution of economic variables by industry and size. 7 

### Specificall y, the tables report data for each industry on the number of firms (Ta ble 6
. 0 ), number of establishments ( Table 6
. 1 ), employ

ment ( Table 6
. 2 ), and receipts (Table 6
. 3 ) b y enterprise size category in affected sectors. Similar results are shown for commercial and residential sources in Tables 6
. 4 through 6
. 7
. The census defini tions in these data elements are as follows:

 establishmen t: An establishment is a single phys ical location where business is conducted or where services or industrial operations are performed.

 employment : Paid employ ment consists of full

- and part

- time employees, including salaried officers and executives of corporations, who were on the pay roll in the pay period including March 12. Included are employees on sick leave, holidays, and vacations; not included are proprietors and partners of unincorporated bu sinesses.

 receipts : Receipts (net of taxes) are defined as the revenue for goods produced, distributed, or services provided, including revenue earned from premiums, commissions and fees, rents, interest, dividends, and royalties. Receipts exclude all revenue collected for local, state, and federal taxes.

 enterprise : An enterprise is a business organization consisting of one or more domestic establishments that were specified under common ownership or control. The enterprise and the establishment are the s ame for single

- establishment firms. Each multiestablishment company forms one enterprise

—the enterprise employment and annual pay

roll are summed from the associated establishments. Enterprise size designations are determined by the summed employ

ment of all associated establishments. 8 

### The SBA small business size standard(s ) is provided for each industry group in order to facilitate comparisons and different thresholds. The receipt data are reported in 200 2 dollars. Therefore, to adjust to 2007 dollars for c omparison to costs , EPA used the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics ’ c onsumer p rice index (CPI). Using the annual U.S. city average price index for all consumer goods , EPA adjusted revenues to 2007 dollars

.

7 These data were developed in cooperation with, and partially funded by, the Office of Advocacy of the Small B usiness Administration (SBA)

. 8 Because the SBA ’ s business size definitions (SBA, 2008c) apply to an establishment ’ s “ultimate parent company, ” we assume in this analysis that the “ enterprise ” definition above is consistent with the concept of ultimate parent company that is typically used for Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) screening analyses and the terms are used interchangeably.55 

### T able 6 . 0 . Number of Firms by Industry and Ente rprise Size: 2002

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard Total

Firms <20

E mpl oyees 20 to 99

E mpl oyees 100 to 499

E mpl oyees 500 to 749

E mpl oyees 750 to 999

E mpl oyees 1,000 to

1,499 E mpl oyees Electricity Generating Units Electricity Generating Units 22 1 7,603 5,636 901 288 26 18 19
Industrial Adipic Acid Production 325199 1 , 000 443 157 95 59 16 3 10 Industrial Aluminum Production 331312 1 , 000 43 28 2 3 1 1 NA Industrial Ammonia Manufacturing 325311 1 , 000 130 78 18 6 2 1 7 Ind ustrial Cement Production 327310 750 136 67 21 12 6 3 4 Industrial Electronics Manufacturing 334 2 13,833 7,698 3,291 1,149 150 80 86 Industrial Ferroalloy Production 331112 750 14 3 NA 5 NA 1 1 Industrial Glass Production 327 500

– 1 , 000 11,395 7,108 2,553 590 57 51 32 Industrial HCFC
- 22 Production 325120 1 , 000 87 45 12 8 NA 3 2 Industrial Hydrogen Production 325120 1 , 000 87 45 12 8 NA 3 2 Industrial Iron and Steel Production 331111 1 , 000 1,135 687 166 53 9 12 11 Industrial Lead Production 3314 750

– 1 , 000 760 384 161 74 14 8 5 Industrial Lime Manufacturing 327410 500 41 16 10 4 1 2 1 Industrial Magnesium Production 3314 750

– 1 , 000 760 384 161 74 14 8 5 Industrial Nitric Acid Producti on 325311 1,000 130 78 18 6 2 1 7 Industrial Petrochemical Production 3251 500

– 1 , 000 1,145 475 277 131 29 14 20 Industrial Petroleum Refineries 324110 3 202 84 24 23 6 3 3 Industrial Phosphoric Acid Production 325312 500 35 12 5 6 1 NA 2 Industrial Pulp and Paper Manufacturing 3221 750 338 96 55 72 7 12 12 Industrial Silicon Carbide Production 327910 500 299 161 94 25 2 NA NA Industrial Soda Ash Manufacturing 325181 1,000 25 10 5 2 NA 1 1 Industrial Titan ium Dioxide Production 325188 1,000 367 139 92 43 11 6 3 Industrial Zinc Production 3314 750

– 1 , 000 760 384 161 74 14 8 5 Industrial Ethanol Production 325193 1,000 60 19 16 3 1 NA 3 Industrial Food Processing 311 500

– 1 , 000 21,384 13 ,645 3,935 1,247 147 63 96 Energy Underground Coal Mines 21211 500 802 387 246 67 6 6 3 Energy Oil and Natural Gas Systems 211 500 6,317 5,184 354 89 13 11 5 (continued)56 

### T able 6 . 0 . Number of Firms by Industry and Enterprise Size: 2002 (continued)

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard Total

Firms <20

E mpl oyees 20 to 99

E mpl oyees 100 to 499

E mpl oyees 500 to 749

E mpl oyees 750 to 999

E mpl oyees 1,000 to

1,499 E mpl oyees Energy Oil and Natural Gas Systems 486 4 244 110 22 16 8 3 2 Waste Treatment Landfills 562 $12.5 million 14,184 10,726 1,616 258 22 11 15 Waste Treatment MWCs 562 $12.5 million 14,184 10,726 1,616 258 22 11 15 The Census Bureau defines an enterprise as a business organization consisting o f one or more domestic establishments that were specified under common ownership or control. The enterprise and the establishment are the same for single

- establishment firms. Each multiestablishment company forms one enterprise

— the enterprise employment an d annual payroll are summed from the associated establishments. Enterprise size designations are determined by the summed em ployment of all associated establishments. Since the SBA ’ s business size definitions (http://www.sba.gov/size) apply to an establishment ’ s ultimate parent company, we assume in this analysis that the enterprise definition above is consistent with the concept of ultimate parent company that is typically used for SBREFA screening analyses. SBA size standards as of 8/11/08. 1 NAICS codes 221111, 221112, 221113, 221119, 221121, 221122 : A firm is small if, including its affiliates, it is primarily engaged in the generation, transmission, and/or distribution of electric energy for sale and its total electric output for the preceding fiscal y ear did not exceed 4 million megawatt hours. 2 NAICS Subsectors 333, 334, 335 and 336 : For rebuilding machinery or equipment on a factory basis, or equivalent, use the NAICS code for a newly manufactured product. Concerns performing major rebuilding or ove rhaul activities do not necessarily have to meet the criteria for being a “ manufacturer” although the activities may be classified under a manufacturing NAICS code. Ordinary repair services or preservation are not considered rebuilding. 3 500 to 1,500. Fo r NAICS code 324110 : For purposes of Government procurement, the petroleum refiner must be a concern that has 1,500 employees or fewer or has 125,000 barrels per calendar day or less total Operable Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation capacity. Capacity includes ow ned or leased facilities as well as facilities under a processing agreement or an arrangement such as an exchange agreement or a throughput. The total product to be delivered under the contract must be at least 90 percent refined by the successful b idder from either crude oil or bona fide feedstocks. 4 Subsector 486 : Pipeline Transportation (486110 Pipeline Transportation of Crude Oil 1,500, 486210 Pipeline Transportation of Natural Gas $7. 0 million, 486910 Pipeline Transportation of Refined Petroleum Products 1,500, 486990 All Other Pipeline Transportation $34.5 million)

.57 

### Table 6 . 1 . Number of Establishments by Affected Industry and Enterprise Size: 2002

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard Total

E s tablish me nts <20

E mpl oyees 20 to 99

E mp loyees 100 to 499

E mpl oyees 500 to 749

E mpl oyees 750 to 999

E mpl oyees 1,000 to

1,499 E mpl oyees Electricity Generating Units Electricity Generating Units 22 1 18,432 5,715 1,423 1,126 282 144 209
Industrial Adipic Acid Production 325199 1 , 000 640 157 99 78 24 4 17 Industrial Aluminum Production 331312 1 , 000 50 28 2 4 1 1 NA Industrial Ammonia Manufacturing 325311 1 , 000 157 78 18 15 5 1 12 Industrial Cement Production 327310 750 253 67 29 22 11 9 20 Industrial El ectronics Manufacturing 334 2 15,883 7,709 3,435 1,497 282 130 174 Industrial Ferroalloy Production 331112 750 17 3 NA 7 NA 1 1 Industrial Glass Production 327 500

– 1 , 000 16,674 7,161 3,302 1,788 306 438 337 Industrial HCFC
- 22 P roduction 325120 1 , 000 551 45 20 20 NA 30 55 Industrial Hydrogen Production 325120 1 , 000 551 45 20 20 NA 30 55 Industrial Iron and Steel Production 331111 1 , 000 1,242 690 169 62 9 19 18 Industrial Lead Production 3314 750

– 1 , 000 958 386 174 108 24 14 11 Industrial Lime Manufacturing 327410 500 77 18 13 6 7 19 4 Industrial Magnesium Production 3314 750

– 1 , 000 958 386 174 108 24 14 11 Industrial Nitric Acid Production 325311 1,000 157 78 18 15 5 1 12 Industrial Petrochemical Production 3251 500

– 1 , 000 2,287 478 316 231 68 63 97 Industrial Petroleum Refineries 324110 3 349 85 29 28 10 7 3 Industrial Phosphoric Acid Production 325312 500 50 12 5 6 2 NA 2 Industrial Pulp and Paper Manufacturing 3221 750 628 97 55 88 13 34 21 Industrial Silicon Carbide Production 327910 500 347 161 100 42 2 NA NA Industrial Soda Ash Manufacturing 325181 1,000 38 10 5 4 NA 1 1 Industrial Titanium Dioxide Production 325188 1,000 6 11 141 111 69 38 25 6 Industrial Zinc Production 3314 750

– 1 , 000 958 386 174 108 24 14 11 Industrial Ethanol Production 325193 1,000 66 20 16 5 1 NA 4 Industrial Food Processing 311 500

– 1 , 000 25,698 13,719 4,254 1,951 370 2 11 319 Energy Underground Coal Mines 21211 500 1,194 390 279 138 23 20 24 (continued)58 

### Table 6 . 1 . Number of Establishments by Affected Industry and Enterprise Size: 2002 (continued)

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard Total

Establi sh me nts <20

E mpl oyees 20 to 99

E mpl oyees 100 to 499

E mpl oyees 500 to 749

E mpl oyees 750 to 999

E mpl oyees 1,000 to

1,499 E mpl oyees Energy Oil and Natural Gas Systems 211 500 7,629 5,239 456 292 60 64 31 Energy Oil and Natural Gas Systems 486 4 2, 701 110 59 79 115 5 42 Waste Treatment Landfills 562 $12.5 million 17,698 10,775 1,839 612 86 63 58 Waste Treatment MWCs 562 $12.5 million 17,698 10,775 1,839 612 86 63 58 The Census Bureau defines an enterprise as a business organization consisting of one or more domestic establishments that were specified under common ownership or control. The enterprise and the establishment are the same for single

- establishment firms. Each multiestablishment company forms one enterprise

—the enterprise e mployment and annual payroll are summed from the associated establishments. Enterprise size designations are determined by the summed employment of all associated establishments. Since the SBA ’ s business size definitions (http://www.sba.gov/size) apply to an establishment ’ s ultimate parent company, we assume in this analysis that the enterprise definition above is consistent with the concept of ultimate parent company that is typically used for SBREFA screening analyses. SBA Small Entity standards as of 8 /11/08. 1 NAICS codes 221111, 221112, 221113, 221119, 221121, 221122 : A firm is small if, including its affiliates, it is primarily engaged in the generation, transmission, and/or distribution of electric energy for sale and its total electric output for the preceding fiscal year did not exceed 4 million megawatt hours. 2 NAICS Subsectors 333, 334, 335 and 336 : For rebuilding machinery or equipment on a factory basis, or equivalent, use the NAICS code for a newly manufactured product. Concerns performing major rebuilding or overhaul activities do not necessarily have to meet the criteria for being a “ manufacturer” although the activities may be classified under a manufacturing NAICS code. Ordinary repair services or preservation are not considered rebuilding. 3 500 to 1,500. For NAICS code 324110 : For purposes of Government procurement, the petroleum refiner must be a concern that has 1,500 employees or fewer and has 125,000 barrels or less per calendar day total Operable Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillati on capacity. Capacity includes owned or leased facilities as well as facilities under a processing agreement or an arrangement such as an exchange agreement or a throughput. The total product to be delivered under the contract must be at least 90 percent refined by the successful bidder from either crude oil or bona fide feedstocks. 4 Subsector 486 : Pipeline Transportation (486110 Pipeline Transportation of Crude Oil 1,500, 486210 Pipeline Transportation of Natural Gas $7. 0 million, 486910 Pipeline Transpo rtation of Refined Petroleum Products 1,500, 486990 All Other Pipeline Transportation $34.5 million)

.59 

### Table 6 . 2 . Number of Employees by Affected Industry and Enterprise Size: 2002

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard T otal

Establish me nt s <2 0

E mpl oyees 20 to 99

E mpl oyees 100 to 499

E mpl oyees 500 to 749

E mpl oyees 750 to 999

E mpl oyees 1,000 to

1,499 E mpl oyees Electricity Generating Units El e ctricity Generating Units 22 1 648,254 24,257 39,391 46,942 12,042 6,519 14,653
Industrial Adipic Acid Production 325199 1 , 000 73,342 1,023 2,412 3,232 NA 754 NA Industrial Aluminum Production 331312 1 , 000 10,158 38 NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Ammonia Manufacturing 325311 1 , 000 4,949 363 210 NA NA NA NA Industrial Cement Production 327310 750 16,90 5 493 418 1,157 NA NA 2,051 Industrial Electronics Manufacturing 334 2 1,300,411 50,279 139,966 186,772 53,138 33,589 43,361 Industrial Ferroalloy Production 331112 750 2,266 NA NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Glass Production 327 500

– 1 , 000 475, 476 47,315 98,637 85,569 17,516 17,946 17,512 Industrial HCFC
- 22 Production 325120 1 , 000 9,557 88 294 510 NA NA NA Industrial Hydrogen Production 325120 1 , 000 9,557 88 294 510 NA NA NA Industrial Iron and Steel Production 331111 1 , 000 124,703 1,434 6,235 3,227 1,456 NA NA Industrial Lead Production 3314 750

– 1 , 000 64,203 2,421 6,680 10,407 NA NA 1,337 Industrial Lime Manufacturing 327410 500 4,393 33 227 NA NA NA NA Industrial Magnesium Production 3314 750

– 1 , 000 64,203 2,421 6,680 10 ,407 NA NA 1,337 Industrial Nitric Acid Production 325311 1,000 4,949 363 210 NA NA NA NA Industrial Petrochemical Production 3251 500

– 1 , 000 172,964 3,171 10,392 16,525 5,548 3,354 5,001 Industrial Petroleum Refineries 324110 3 62,132 454 942 2,870 2,903 NA NA Industrial Phosphoric Acid 325312 500 6,288 27 NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Pulp and Paper 3221 750 162,988 537 2,279 12,554 2,782 7,707 7,121 Industrial Silicon Carbide Production 327910 500 16,079 1,237 3,637 3,536 NA NA NA Industrial Soda Ash Manufacturing 325181 1,000 4,483 56 NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Titanium Dioxide Production 325188 1,000 49,845 566 881 1,839 NA NA NA Industrial Zinc Production 3314 750

– 1 , 000 64,203 2,421 6,680 10,407 NA NA 1,337 Industri al Ethanol Production 325193 1,000 64,203 2,421 6,680 10,407 NA NA 1,337 Industrial Food Processing 311 500

– 1 , 000 1,735 NA NA NA NA NA NA Energy Underground Coal Mines 21211 500 1,443,766 85,850 156,158 218,041 67,104 30,099 72,262 (continued)60 

### Tabl e 6 . 2 . Number of Employees by Affected Industry and Enterprise Size: 2002 (continued)

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard Total

Establish me nts <20

E mpl oyees 20 to 99

E mpl oyees 100 to 499

E mpl oyees 500 to 749

E mpl oyees 750 to 999

E mpl oyees 1,0 00 to

1,499 E mpl oyees Energy Oil and Natural Gas Systems 211 500 74,915 2,801 10,205 11,576 NA 1,773 NA Energy Oil and Natural Gas Systems 486 4 88,280 19,336 12,113 11,656 2,421 3,551 1,061 Waste Treatment L andfills 562 $12.5 million 300,580 56,529 59,245 37,530 5,122 3,401 3,645 Waste Treatment MWCs 562 $12.5 million 300,580 56,529 59,245 37,530 5,122 3,401 3,645 The Census Bureau defines an enterprise as a business organization consisting of one or more domestic establishments that were specified under common ownership or control. The enterprise and the establishment are the same for single

- establishment firms. Each multi

- establishment company forms one enterprise

—the enterprise employment and annual payroll are summed from the a ssociated establishments. Enterprise size designations are determined by the summed employment of all associated establishments. Since the SBA ’ s business size definitions (http://www.sba.gov/size) apply to an establishment ’ s ultimate parent company, we as sume in this analysis that the enterprise definition above is consistent with the concept of ultimate parent company that is typically used for SBREFA screening analyses. SBA small entity definitions as of 8/11/08. 1 NAICS codes 221111, 221112, 221113, 2 21119, 221121, 221122 : A firm is small if, including its affiliates, it is primarily engaged in the generation, transmission, and/or distribution of electric energy for sale and its total electric output for the preceding fiscal year did not exceed 4 milli on megawatt hours. 2 NAICS Subsectors 333, 334, 335 and 336 : For rebuilding machinery or equipment on a factory basis, or equivalent, use the NAICS code for a newly manufactured product. Concerns performing major rebuilding or overhaul activities do not n ecessarily have to meet the criteria for being a “ manufacturer” although the activities may be classified under a manufacturing NAICS code. Ordinary repair services or preservation are not considered rebuilding. 3 500 to 1,500. For NAICS code 324110 : For purposes of Government procurement, the petroleum refiner must be a concern that has 1,500 employees or fewer or 125,000 barrels or less per calendar day total Operable Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation capacity. Capacity includes owned or leased facilit ies as well as facilities under a processing agreement or an arrangement such as an exchange agreement or a throughput. The total product to be delivered under the contract must be at least 90 percent refined by the successful bidder from either crude oil or bona fide feedstocks. 4 Subsector 486 : Pipeline Transportation (486110 Pipeline Transportation of Crude Oil 1,500, 486210 Pipeline Transportation of Natural Gas $7. 0 million, 486910 Pipeline Transportation of Refined Petroleum Products 1,500, 486990 Al l Other Pipeline Transportation $34.5 million)

.61 

### Table 6 . 3 . Receipts by Industry and Enterprise Size: 2002 (in millions of 2007$)

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard Total

Receipt s ($) <20

E mpl oyees 20 to 99

E mpl oyees 100 to 499

E mpl oyees 50 0 to 749

E mpl oyees 750 to 999

E mpl oyees 1,000 to

1,499 E mpl oyees Electricity Generating Units Electricity Generating Units 22 1 456,494 10,324 28,259 29,111 8,522 5,211 11,027
Industrial Adipic Acid Production 325199 1 , 000 54,024 437 880 2,117 NA 984 NA Industrial Aluminum Production 331312 1 , 000 4,165 7 NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Ammonia Manufacturing 325311 1 , 000 3,844 152 60 NA NA NA NA Industrial Cement Production 327310 750 8,358 207 120 526 NA NA 992 Industrial Electronics Manufacturing 334 2 437,886 9,887 26,268 41,653 14,340 8,589 12,994 Industrial Ferroalloy Production 331112 750 1,008 NA NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Glass Production 327 500

– 1 , 000 110,002 7,430 17,700 16,967 4,154 4,000 4,366 Industrial HCFC
- 22 Production 325120 1 , 000 6,662 25 337 82 NA NA NA Industrial Hydrogen Production 325120 1 , 000 6,662 25 337 82 NA NA NA Industrial Iron and Steel Production 331111 1 , 000 54,363 275 1,237 1,192 639 NA NA Industrial Lead Production 3314 750

– 1 , 000 24,584 582 2,391 3,007 NA NA 364 Industrial Lime Manufacturing 327410 500 1,173 7 64 NA NA NA NA Industrial Magnesium Production 3314 750

– 1 , 000 24,584 582 2,391 3,007 NA NA 364 Industrial Nitric Acid Production 325311 1,000 3,844 152 60 NA NA NA NA Industrial Petrochemical Production 3251 500

– 1 , 000 123,343 1,603 4,722 7,974 3,990 2,048 3,819 Industrial Petroleum Refineries 324110 3 225,612 538 2,903 5,186 10,094 NA NA Industrial Phosphoric Acid Production 325312 500 4,607 7 NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Pulp and Paper Manufacturing 3221 750 81,766 146 719 5,269 805 3,294 2,833 Industrial Silicon Carbide Production 327910 500 3,861 206 561 715 NA NA NA Industrial Soda Ash Manufacturing 325181 1,000 2,386 12 NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Titanium Dioxide Production 325188 1,000 18,803 199 267 685 NA NA NA Industrial Zinc Production 3314 750

– 1000 24,584 582 2,391 3,007 NA NA 364 Industrial Ethanol Production 325193 1,000 2,416 NA NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Food Processing 311 500

– 1000 527,312 14,597 37,198 65,304 26,627 11,533 25,216 (continued)62 

### Table 6 . 3 . Receipts by Industry and Enterprise Size: 2002 (in Millions of 2007$) (continued)

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard Total

Receipts ($) <20

E mpl oyees 20 to 99

E mpl oyees 100 to 499

E mpl oyees 500 to 749

E mpl oyees 750 to 999

E mpl oyees 1,000 to

1,499 E mpl oyees Energy Underground Coal Mines 21211 500 22,873 501 2,415 3,328 NA 506 NA Energy Oil and Natural Gas Systems 211 500 185,42 0 8,465 7,826 11,075 5,312 4,600 3,233 Energy Oil and Natural Gas Systems 486 4 51,926 1,163 158 258 NA NA NA Waste Treatment Landfills 562 $12.5 million 55,557 7,451 8,366 5,940 965 858 586 Waste Treatment MWCs 562 $12.5 million 55,5 57 7,451 8,366 5,940 965 858 586 The Census Bureau defines an enterprise as a business organization consisting of one or more domestic establishments that were specified under common ownership or control. The enterprise and the establishment are th e same for single

- establishment firms. Each multi

- establishment company forms one enterprise

—the enterprise employment and annual payroll are summed from the associated establishments. Enterprise size designations are determined by the summed employment of all associated establishments. Since the SBA ’ s business size definitions (http://www.sba.gov/size) apply to an establishment ’ s ultimate parent company, we assume in this analysis that the enterprise definition above is consistent with the concept of ulti mate parent company that is typically used for SBREFA screening analyses. SBA Small Business categorization as of 8/11/08. 1 NAICS codes 221111, 221112, 221113, 221119, 221121, 221122 : A firm is small if, including its affiliates, it is primarily engaged in the generation, transmission, and/or distribution of electric energy for sale and its total electric output for the preceding fiscal year did not exceed 4 million megawatt hours. 2 NAICS Subsectors 333, 334, 335 and 336 : For rebuilding machinery or equipment on a factory basis, or equivalent, use the NAICS code for a newly manufactured product. Concerns performing major rebuilding or overhaul activities do not necessarily have to meet the criteri a for being a “ manufacturer” although the activities may be classified under a manufacturing NAICS code. Ordinary repair services or preservation are not considered rebuilding. 3 500 to 1,500. For NAICS code 324110: For purposes of Government procurement, the petroleum refiner must be a concern that has 1,500 employees or fewer and 125,000 barrels or less per calendar day total Operable Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation capacity. Capacity includes owned or leased facilities as well as facilities under a processing agreement or an arrangement such as an exchan ge agreement or a throughput. The total product to be delivered under the contract must be at least 90 percent refined by the successful bidder from either crude oil or bona fide feedstocks. 4 Subsector 486 : Pipeline Transportation (486110 Pipeline Transpo rtation of Crude Oil 1,500, 486210 Pipeline Transportation of Natural Gas $7.0 million, 486910 Pipeline Transportation of Refined Petroleum Products 1,500, 486990 All Other Pipeline Transportation $34.5 million)63 

### Table 6 . 4 . Number of Firms by Affected I ndustry and Enterprise Size in Commercial Sectors : 2002

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard in M illions of D ollars Total

Firms <20

E mpl oyees 20 to 99

E mpl oyees 100 to 499

E mpl oyees 500 to 749

E mpl oyees 750 to 999

E mpl oyees 1,000 to

1,499 E mpl oy ees Commercial Education 61 $ 7.0 35.0 65,933 40,824 12,379 3,071 289 174 187 Commercial Enclosed M all 531120 7.0 28,241 22,509 1,077 329 43 32 30 Commercial Food S ales NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Commercial Food S ervice 722 7.0 20.5 376,637 2 48,494 67,549 6,629 447 191 223 Commercial Inpatient H ealth C are 622 34.5 4,548 427 487 1,590 384 237 333 Commercial Laboratory 541380 12.0 4,708 3,335 680 148 22 6 12 Commercial Laboratory 5417 7.0 11,418 7,365 1,478 532 72 29 39 Commercial Lodging 721 7.0 51,168 33,326 7,968 1,428 135 70 77 Commercial Nonrefrigerated W arehouse 49311 25.5 3,152 2,005 514 199 15 10 19 Commercial Nursing 623 7.0 13.5 32,720 14,632 8,486 5,836 418 179 174 Commercial Of

fice 531120 7.0 28,241 22,509 1,077 329 43 32 30 Commercial Other 81 7.0 25.0 675,218 568,285 41,363 4,449 290 164 165 Commercial Outpatient H ealth C are 621 7.0 34.5 424,694 351,540 27,991 4,699 428 216 238 Commercial Public A ssembl y 71 7.0 103,043 64,915 12,227 2,292 153 82 95 Commercial Public O rder and S afety NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Commercial Refrigerated W arehouse 49312 25.5 608 358 138 34 3 2 4 Commercial Religious Worship 813110 7.0 172,311 147,505 15,942 1,213 39 21 19 Commercial Retail O ther than M all 44
- 45 7.0 29.0 736,130 579,905 59,639 8,723 577 289 338 Commercial Service 81 7.0 25.0 675,218 568,285 41,363 4,449 290 164 165 Commercial Strip S hopping M all 531120 7.0 28,241 22,509 1,077 329 43 32 30 Residential Residential 531110 7.0 52,190 44,477 1,799 441 55 29 30 The Census Bureau defines an enterprise as a business organization consisting of one or more domestic establishments that were specified under common ownership or control. The enterprise and the establishment are the same for single

- establishment firms. Each multi

- establishment company forms one enterprise

—the enterprise employment and annual payroll are summed from the associated establishments. Enterprise size designations are determined by the summed employment of all associated establishments. Since the SBA ’ s business size definitions (http://www.sba.gov/size) apply to an establishment ’ s ultimate parent company, we assume in this analysis that the enter prise definition above is consistent with the concept of ultimate parent company that is typically used for SBREFA screening analyses. SBA size categories as of 8/11/08.64 

### Table 6 . 5 . Number of Establishments by Affected Industry and Enterprise Size: 20 02

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard Total Firms <20 E mpl oyees 20 to 99

E mpl oyees 100 to 499

E mpl oyees 500 to 749

E mpl oyees 750 to 999

E mpl oyees 1,000 to 1,499

E mpl oyees Commercial Education 61 7.0

– 35.0 73,701 41,136 13,925 5,604 864 398 501 Commercial Enclosed M all 531120 7.0 30,777 22,706 1,313 597 123 180 141 Commercial Food S ales NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Commercial Food S ervice 722 7.0

–20.5 503,354 249,889 79,906 31,769 7,297 4,524 6,819 Commercial Inpatient H ealth C are 622 34.5 7,569 441 513 1,725 442 294 420 Commercial Laboratory 541380 12.0 5,962 3,371 972 488 67 41 195 Commercial Laboratory 5417 7.0 13,944 7,462 1,836 996 228 112 150 Commercial Lodging 721 7.0 61,795 33,613 9,057 2,962 761 249 663 Commercial Nonrefrigerated

Warehouse 49311 25.5 4,893 2,057 805 529 311 97 87 Commercial Nursing 623 7.0

– 13.5 67,900 14,824 11,701 18,516 3,717 1,898 2,043 Commercial Office 531120 7.0 30,777 22,706 1,313 597 123 180 1 41 Commercial Other 81 7.0

–25.0 740,118 573,318 54,021 16,431 2,960 1,850 2,317 Commercial Outpatient H ealth

C are 621 7.0

– 34.5 487,747 357,221 41,650 19,182 3,021 2,087 1,933 Commercial Public A ssembly 71 7.0 110,375 65,195 13,408 3,71 5 566 591 394 Commercial Public O rder and

S afety NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Commercial Refrigerated

Warehouse 49312 25.5 970 367 204 96 20 13 36 Commercial Religious Worship 813110 7.0 172,562 147,510 16,009 1,272 115 25 27 Commercial Ret ail O ther than M all 44
- 45 7.0

–29.0 1,125,693 594,655 98,116 51,814 12,028 8,897 13,004 Commercial Service 81 7.0

–25.0 740,118 573,318 54,021 16,431 2,960 1,850 2,317 Commercial Strip S hopping M all 531120 7.0 30,777 22,706 1,313 597 123 180 141 (continued)65 

### Table 6 . 5 . Number of Establishments by Affected Industry and Enterprise Size: 2002 (continued)

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard Total Firms <20 E mpl oyees 20 to 99

E mpl oyees 100 to 499

E mpl oyees 500 to 749

E mpl oyees 750 to 999

E mpl oyees 1,000 to 1,499

E mpl oyees Residential Residential 531110 7.0 57,748 45,104 2,992 2,491 479 132 205 The Census Bureau defines an enterprise as a business organization consisting of one or more domestic establishments that were specified under common ownership or control. The enterprise and the establishment are the same for single

- establishment firms. Each multi

- establishment company forms one enterprise

—the enterprise employment and annual payroll are summed from the associated establishments. Enterprise size designations are determined by the summed employment of all associated establishments. Since the SBA ’ s business size definitions (http://www.sba.gov/size) apply to an establishment ’ s ultimate parent company, we assume in this analysis that the enterprise definition above is consistent with the concept of ultimate parent company that is typically used for SBREFA screening analyses. SBA small business categories as of 8/11//08.66 

### T able 6 . 6 . Number of Employees by Affected I ndustry and Commercial Enterprise Size: 2002

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard Total

Establish me nts <20

E mpl oyees 20 to 99

E mpl oyees 100 to 499

E mpl oyees 500 to 749

E mpl oyees 750 to 999

E mpl oyees 1,000 to

1,499 E mpl oyees Commercial Education 61 7.0

– 35.0 2,701,675 223,695 516,135 535,272 148,370 121,656 190,930 Commercial Enclosed M all 531120 7.0 163,501 73,311 32,364 22,319 5,066 3,583 4,095 Commercial Food S ales NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Commercial Food S ervice 722 7.0

–20.5 8, 352,174 1,622,740 2,551,714 1,184,119 232,483 134,402 216,606 Commercial Inpatient H ealth C are 622 34.5 5,121,584 2,374 30,243 389,501 220,984 192,908 385,312 Commercial Laboratory 541380 12.0 100,797 18,415 25,714 19,918 3,920 2,677 4,786 Commercial Laboratory 5417 7.0 399,213 35,669 60,951 84,936 22,983 9,641 15,808 Commercial Lodging 721 7.0 1,696,701 202,509 292,528 232,976 56,837 37,156 53,296 Commercial Nonrefrigerated

Warehouse 49311 25.5 94,316 11,294 18,392 21,859 3,802 2,144 2,654 Commercial Nursing 623 7.0

– 13.5 2,770,665 92,274 409,004 965,200 172,278 91,599 132,119 Commercial Office 531120 7.0 163,501 73,311 32,364 22,319 5,066 3,583 4,095 Commercial Other 81 7.0

–25.0 5,420,087 2,54 7,460 1,482,350 640,068 84,297 61,553 74,082 Commercial Outpatient H ealth C are 621 7.0

– 34.5 4,917,156 1,829,546 1,029,355 751,711 134,712 89,264 107,577 Commercial Public A ssembly 71 7.0 1,800,991 315,475 496,962 380,688 65,678 NA 72,28 2 Commercial Public O rder and S afety NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Commercial Refrigerated

Warehouse 49312 25.5 28,100 2,238 5,427 5,010 NA NA 1,545 Commercial Religious Worship 813110 7.0 1,638,915 722,630 607,209 197,037 20,211 13,453 14,081 Co mmercial Retail O ther than M all 44

–45 7.0

–29.0 14,819,904 2,889,481 2,204,104 1,267,733 213,518 138,205 200,867 Commercial Service 81 7.0

–25.0 5,420,087 2,547,460 1,482,350 640,068 84,297 61,553 74,082 Commercial Strip S hopping M all 531120 7.0 163,501 73,311 32,364 22,319 5,066 3,583 4,095 Residential Residential 531110 7.0 281,250 152,350 59,796 42,104 7,627 NA NA The Census Bureau defines an enterprise as a business organization consisting of one or more domestic establishments that were specified under common ownership or control. The enterprise and the establishment are the same for single

- establishment firms. Each multi

- establishment company forms one enterprise

—the enterprise employment and annual payroll are summed from the associated establishments. Enterprise size designations are determined by the summed employment of all associated establishments. Since the SBA ’ s business size definitions (http://www.sba.gov/size) apply to an establishment ’ s ultimate parent company, we assume in this analysis that the enterprise definition above is consistent with the concept of ultimate parent company that is typically used for SBREFA screening analyses. SBA small business sizes as of 8/11/08.67 

### Table 6 . 7 . Receipts by Affected Indu stry and Enterprise Size: 2002 (Millions of 2007 $)

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard in M illions of D ollars Total

Receipt s <20

E mpl oyees 20 to 99

E mpl oyees 100 to 499

E mpl oyees 500 to 749

E mpl oyees 750 to 999

E mpl oyees 1,000 to

1,499 E mpl oye es Commercial Education 61 7.0

– 35.0 207,779 15,586 30,849 38,207 10,456 7,620 11,997 Commercial Enclosed M all 531120 7.0 52,796 21,467 8,090 6,609 2,148 2,145 3,281 Commercial Food S ales NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Commercial Food S ervice 722 7.0

–20.5 373,666 79,827 98,916 49,500 9,774 5,742 9,036 Commercial Inpatient H ealth C are 622 34.5 575,286 845 2,892 33,554 20,075 18,448 41,167 Commercial Laboratory 541380 12.0 11,854 2,018 2,763 2,091 478 319 574 Commercial Laboratory 5417 7.0 72,013 6,419 10,785 15,439 4,422 1,942 2,802 Commercial Lodging 721 7.0 141,193 15,159 18,413 15,047 4,287 2,869 4,431 Commercial Nonrefrigerated

Warehouse 49311 25.5 10,705 1,546 2,199 2,281 508 286 301 Commercial Nur sing 623 7.0

– 13.5 145,529 4,624 18,714 49,332 9,058 4,989 7,319 Commercial Office 531120 7.0 52,796 21,467 8,090 6,609 2,148 2,145 3,281 Commercial Other 81 7.0

–25.0 491,097 215,897 120,283 67,821 10,225 5,946 5,999 Commercial Outpatient H ealth C are 621 7.0

– 34.5 582,829 229,611 118,216 73,667 12,923 8,277 10,556 Commercial Public A ssembly 71 7.0 170,062 35,446 31,146 35,130 6,972 NA 7,610 Commercial Public O rder and S afety NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Commercial Refrigerated W arehouse 49312 25.5 4,889 325 765 586 NA NA 233 Commercial Religious Worship 813110 7.0 95,558 37,076 34,178 13,933 1,681 1,165 1,025 Commercial Retail O ther than M all 44

–45 7.0

–29.0 3,612,583 577,700 662,037 441,243 65,923 34,570 49,386 Commercial Service 81 7.0

–25.0 491,097 215,897 120,283 67,821 10,225 5,946 5,999 Commercial Strip S hopping M all 531120 7.0 52,796 21,467 8,090 6,609 2,148 2,145 3,281 Residential Residential 531110 7.0 57,365 32,327 9,943 6, 854 1,366 NA NA The Census Bureau defines an enterprise as a business organization consisting of one or more domestic establishments that were specified under common ownership or control. The enterprise and the establishment are the same for single

- establishment firms. Each multi

- establishment company forms one enterprise

—the enterprise employment and annual payroll are summed from the associated establishments. Enterprise size designations are determined by the summed employment of all associated establ ishments. Since the SBA ’ s business size definitions (http://www.sba.gov/size) apply to an establishment ’ s ultimate parent company, we assume in this analysis that the enterprise definition above is consistent with the concept of ultimate parent company that is typically used for SBREFA screening analyses. SBA small business sizes as of 8/11.08.

### 68

Because the SBA ’ s business size definitions (SBA, 2008c) appl y to an establishment ’ s

“ultimate parent company , ” we assume in this analysis that the “ enterprise ” def inition above is consistent with the concept of ultimate parent company that is ty picall y used for SBREFA screening anal ys es , and the terms are used interchangeabl y. We also report the SBA size standard(s) for each industry group to facilitate comparisons and different thresholds. 6 . 2 Developing Economic and Small Entity Regulatory Relief Impact Measures We measured the postponed impacts of the rule on small entities in each sector using methods pre sented in EPA ’ s Final SBREFA Guidance (EPA, 2006)

. Because the rule covers a large number of sectors and primarily covers businesses, the analy sis generated a set of sales tests (represented as cost

- to - receipt ratios) 9 

### for NAICS codes associated with the affected sectors. Although the appropriate SBA size definition should be applied at the parent company (enterprise) level, data limitations allowed us only to compute and compare ratios for a model establishment for six enterprise size ranges (i.e., all categories, enterprises with 1 to 20 employees, 20 to 99 empl oyees, 100 to 499 employees, 500 to 999 employees, and 1,000 to 1,499 employees ) . This approach allow ed us to account for differences in establishment receipts between large and small enterprises and differences in small business definitions across affecte d industries. It is also a conservative approach, because an establishment ’ s parent company (the

“ enterprise ” ) may

have other economic resources that could be used to cover the costs of the reporting program. 6 . 3 Implementing the Sales Test to Measure Impa cts on Industrial, Commercial , and Multifamily Residential Sources To implement the recommended sales test , EPA computed cost

- to - sales ratios for affected sectors at the establishment (or facility) level. 10 

### The ratios examine the ratio of the average

9 The following metrics for other small entity economic impact measures (if applicable) would potentially include
 Small governments (if applicable): “Revenue” test

—annualized compliance cost as a percentage of annual government revenues  Small nonprofits (if applicable): “Expenditure” test

—annualized compliance cost as a percentage of annual operating e xpenses 10 Ty pically, SBREFA impact assessments are conducted at the ultimate parent company level. As noted above, we assume that Census definition of enterprise is equivalent to ultimate parent company. Theoretically, the comparison of compliance costs to sales should be conducted at the enterprise level. Because Census only provides data for typical establishments within various enterprise size categories, EPA chose to compute the cost - to - sales ratio at the establishment (or facility level). The same rati o could be computed at the enterprise level by multiplying both the numerator and the denominator by the typical number of establishments per enterprise in

### 69

establ ishment ’ s total annualized mandatory reporting costs to the average establishment receipts for enterprises within several emplo ym ent categories

. 11 

### The average entity costs used to compute the sales test are the same across all of these enterprise size categ ories. As a result, the sales test will overstate the cost

- to - receipt ratio for establishments owned b y small businesses, because the reporting costs are likely

lower than average entity estimates provided b y the engineering cost anal ys is. Cost
- to - s ales ratios for industrial categories are reported in Table s 6
. 9 through 6
. 12
. Table 6
. 8 shows impacts avoided for small sources of GHG for title V. In Tables 6
. 9 and 6
. 10 , impacts avoided for new and modifying PSD sources, respectivel y , are presented. Tab l e 6
. 11 shows the avoided costs compared to sales for title V permitting. These ratios are calculated using data on the average avoided cost of compliance per facility and data on the average sales per establishment obtained from the Census Bureau

. Cost
- to - s ales or revenue ratios for commercial and residential categories are reported in Tables 6
. 12 through 6
. 14 . Table 6. 12 shows impacts avoided for small commercial and residential sources of GHG for ti tle V. Tables 6
. 13 and 6
. 14 show impacts avoided for modifying and new PSD commercial and residential sources, respectivel y. The burden avoided per - entity costs of the rule are shown in Table 3

. 0 for title V

. The avoided burden cost associated with obtaining an operating permit is $46.4 thousand per source fo r industrial sources of GHG emissions and approximately $ 23 thousand for commercial and residential sources

. An avoided cost of $1,677 is estimated for sources requiring title V permitting revision. For modifying PSD sources, the avoided burden costs with obtaining a permit is $84.5 thousand per source for industrial sources of GHG emissions and approximately $ 59 thousand per source for commercial and residential sources. Finally , for new PSD sources, the avoided burden costs are the sum of the avoided title V and modifying PSD costs. Thus, the avoided burden costs are approximately $13 0.8 thousand per source for new industrial sources of GHG emissions and approximately $ 82 thousand per source for new commercial and residential sources.

the appropriate enterprise size categories. Using the SUSB data on typical establishments means that the cost

- to sales ratios are identical, whether computed at the establishment level or at the enterprise level. 11 For the one to 20 employee category, we excluded SUSB data for enterprises with zero employees. These enterprises did not operate the entire year.

### 70

The cost

- to - sale s estimates show that the avoided costs fo r industrial sources ty pically are zero up to 1.5 percent of their sales, but they can be as high as 19 percent for certain sources (e.g., aluminum plants with less than 20 employees). For PSD , the avoided I CR cos t - to - sales ratios range from zero to 2.7 percent for modifying and from zero to 4.2 percent of sales for new industrial sources. These avoided cost

- to - sales ratio for PSD do not consider avoided BACT costs due to lack of sufficient data currentl y. For commercial sources, the average av oided cost to sales ratios range from 0.5 to 4.2 percent for title V. The se average avoided cost - to - sales ranges increase for PSD to approximately from 1.2 to 1 0.7 percent of their sales or revenues for modifying commercial and multifamily

residential sources and 1.6 to 14.9 for new commercial and residential PSD sources. 6 . 4 Economic Relief to Permitting Authorities In this final rule , the thresholds for requiring title V and PSD permits are increased above statutory CAA l evels resulting in millions of potential title V sources and tens of thousands of new and modifying PSD sources being able to postpone obtaining a permit for a phase

- in period of about 5 years. This action will provide si gnificant regulatory relief to S tates, local government, and tribal permitting authorities. The magnitude of permits that would need to be addressed and the dollar estimate of the additional costs in labor and administrative costs permitting authorities would otherwise incur if GHG are a regulated pollutant absent this rulemaking are shown in Table s 3
. 0 and 3

. 2 in Section 3

. For title V permits, permitting authorities will experience avoided costs of approximately $ 21 billion relating to approximately 2 million new operating permits annu ally that otherwise would need to be processed. Although this administrative burden represents a huge burden to these agencies , Part 70 of the CAA does provide for a mechanism for the affected permitting authorities to recoup the costs of operation associ ated with administering this expanded permit program. EPA recognizes in this tailoring rule that the sheer magnitude and burden of these additional small GHG sources cannot feasibly be met by

these permitting authorities on administrative burden grounds f or a period of at least 5 ye ars regardless of the ability to include these increased costs in fees charged to sources. However, the economic consequences to permitting authorities of this permitting program are offset in the fee structure these authoritie s are allowed to charge sources obtaining title V permits

.

### 71

For PSD permitting authorities , no such mitigating fee structure currentl y exis ts. Thus, the funding for administering a PSD permitting program to include tens of thousands of additional new and modifying PSD sources annually would need to be met by these permitting authorities from current revenue sources. At present, there are approximately 58 S tate, local , and tribal PSD permitting programs operating in the United States and approximately 49 additional S tate, local , or tribal government authorities that are administering federal programs under delegation from EPA. It is difficult to estimate the economic consequences of the regulatory relief afforded to the individual permitting authorities, be cause the number of PSD permits processed each ye ar varies by permitting authority over time depending on the number of new and modifying sources occurring in a given location . However, the National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA) has, through a member survey , broadl y assessed the additional resource and burden considerations of EPA treating GHG as a regulated pollutant. NACAA provided this information to EPA to help improve our understanding of agencies ’ burdens

. 12 

### Under the current PSD program requirements , these permitting authorities process an average of 8 PSD permits for new and modifying sources each year (range of 0 to 56 for individual respondents). These surveyed permitting authorities indicate they would need an average of 12 new full

- time employees (range of 1 to 63) costing an average of $1.1 million annually (range $60 thousand to $6.3 million) with a 10

- fold increase in permits occurring as a result of including GHG as a regulated pollutant. Some of these permitting authorities indicated that hiring new employee s is not possible at this time because of budget constraints and hiring freezes. All respondents indicated that new training would be needed to address GHG permitting. Rather than the 10

- fold increase in permits postulated in NACAA ’ s survey , EPA estimates the increase would more likely be 1 0 0
- fold making these estimates a significant understatement of the potential impacts on permitting authorities. For more information about the sources affected b y alternative thresholds and currentl y covered b y title V and PSD, see Attachments B and C

.

12 Memorandum from Mary Stewart Douglas NACAA, to Juan E. Santiago, Group Leader, Operating Permits Group, U.S. EPA OAQPS. September 3, 2009.72 

### T able 6 . 8 . Avoided Title V Costs to Sales for Small Industrial Sources of GHG Emissions

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard Average

Cost Per Entity (2007$) Cost per e ntity

fo r All Establishments (% ) Cost per

E ntity for <20 E mpl oyees (% ) Cost per

E ntity for 20 to 99 E mpl oyees (% ) Cost per

E ntity 100 to 499 E mpl oyees (% ) Cost per

E ntity for 500 to 749 E mpl oyees (% ) Cost per

E ntity for 750 to 999 E mpl oyees (% ) Cost per

E ntity for 1,000 to 1,499 E mpl oyees (% ) Electricity Generating Units Electricity Generating

Units 22 1 $46,350 0.2% 2.6% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1%
Industrial Adipic Acid

Production 325199 1 , 000 $46,350 0.1% 1.7% 0.5% 0.2% NA 0.0% NA Industrial Aluminum

Production 331312 1 , 000 $46,350 0.1% 19.0% NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Ammonia

Manufacturing 325311 1 , 000 $46,350 0.2% 2.4% 1.4% NA NA NA NA Industrial Cement Production 327310 750 $46 , 350 0.1% 1.5% 1.1% 0.2% NA NA 0.1% Industrial Electronics

Manufacturing 334 2 $46 , 350 0.2% 3.6% 0.6% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% Industrial Ferroalloy

Production 331112 750 $46 , 350 0.1% NA NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Glass Production 327 500

– 1 , 000 $46 , 350 0.7% 4.5% 0.9% 0.5% 0.3% 0.5% 0.4% Industrial HCFC
- 22 Production 325120 1 , 000 $46 , 350 0. 4% 8.3% 0.3% 1.1% NA NA NA Industrial Hydrogen Production 325120 1 , 000 $46 , 350 0.4% 8.3% 0.3% 1.1% NA NA NA Industrial Iron and Steel

Production 331111 1 , 000 $46350 0.1% 11. 6 % 0.6% 0.2% 0.1% NA NA Industrial Lead Production 3314 750

– 1 , 000 $46 , 350 0.2% 3 .1% 0.3% 0.2% NA NA 0.1% Industrial Lime Manufacturing 327410 500 $46 , 350 0.3% 12.8% 0.9% NA NA NA NA Industrial Magnesium

Production 3314 750

– 1 , 000 $46 , 350 0.2% 3.1% 0.3% 0.2% NA NA 0.1% Industrial Nitric Acid

Production 325311 1,000 $46 , 350 0.2% 2.4% 1.4% NA NA NA NA Industrial Petrochemical

Production 3251 500

– 1 , 000 $46 , 350 0.1% 1.4% 0.3% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% Industrial Petroleum Refineries 324110 3 $46 , 350 0.0% 0.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% NA NA Industrial Phosphoric Acid

Production 325312 500 $46,350 0.1% 7.8% NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Pulp and Paper

Manufacturing 3221 750 $46,350 0.0% 3.1% 0.4% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% (continued)73 

### T able 6 . 8 . Avoided Title V Costs to Sales for Small Industrial Sources of GHG Emissions (continued)

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard Average

Cost Per Entity (2007$) Cost per entity

for All Establishments (% ) Cost per

E ntity for <20 E mpl oyees (% ) Cost per

E ntity for 20 to 99 E mpl oyees (% ) Cost per

E ntity 100 to 499 E mpl oyees (% ) Cost per

E ntity for 500 to 749 E mpl oyees (% ) Cost per

E ntity for 750 to 999 E mpl oyees (% ) Cost per

E ntity for 1,000 to 1,499 E mpl oyees (% ) Industrial Silicon Carbide

Production 327910 500 $46 , 350 0.4% 3.6% 0.8% 0.3% NA NA NA Industrial Soda Ash

Manufacturing 325181 1,000 $46 , 350 0.1% 3.8% NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Titanium Dioxide

Production 325188 1,000 $46 , 350 0.2% 3.3% 1.9% 0.5% NA NA NA Industrial Zinc Production 3314 750

– 1 , 000 $46 , 350 0.2% 3.1% 0.3% 0.2% NA NA 0.1% Industrial Ethanol Production 325193 1,000 $46 , 350 0.1% NA NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Food Processing 311 500

– 1 , 000 $46 , 350 0.2% 4.4% 0.5% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% Energy Underground Coal

Mines 21211 500 $46 , 350 0.2% 3.6% 0.5% 0.2% NA 0.2% NA Energy Oil and Natural Gas

Systems 211 500 $46 , 350 0.2% 2.9% 0.3% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% Energy Oil and Natural Gas

Systems 486 4 $46 , 350 0.2% 0.4% 1.7% 1.4% NA NA NA Waste Treatment Landfills 562 $12.5 million $46 , 350 1.5% 6.7% 1.0% 0.5% 0.4% 0.3% 0.5% Waste Treatment MWCs 562 $12.5 million $46 , 350 1.5% 6.7% 1.0% 0.5% 0.4% 0.3% 0.5% Since the SBA ’ s business size definitions (http://www.sba.gov/size) apply to an establishment ’ s ultimate parent company, we assume in this analysis that the enterprise definition above is consistent with the concept of ultimate parent company that is typically used for Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) screening analyses. 1 NAICS codes 221111, 221112, 221113, 221119, 221121, 221122

– A firm is small if, including its affiliates, it is primarily engaged in the g eneration, transmission, and/or distribution of electric energy for sale and its total electric output for the preceding fiscal year did not exceed 4 million megawatt hours. 2 500 to 1,500. For NAICS code 324110 : For purposes of Government pro curement, the petroleum refiner mus t be a concern that has no more than 1,500 em ployees nor production greater than 125,000 barrels per calendar day total Operable Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation capacity. Capacity includes ow ned or leased facilities as well as facilities under a process ing agreement or an arrangement such as an exchange agreement or a throughput. The total product to be delivered under the contract must be at least 90 percent refined by the successful bidder from either crude oil or bona fide feedstocks. 3 NAICS Subsectors 333, 334, 335 and 336 : For rebuilding machinery or equipment on a factory basis, or equivalent, use the NAICS code for a newly manufactured product. Concerns performing major rebuilding or overhaul activities do not necessarily have to meet the criteri a for being a “ manufacturer” although the activities may be classified under a manufacturing NAICS code. Ordinary repair services or preservation are not considered rebuilding. 4 Subsector 486 : Pipeline Transportation (486110 Pipeline Transportation of Crude Oil 1,500, 486210 Pipeline Transportation of Natural Gas $7.0 million , 486910 Pipeline Transportation of Refined Petroleum Products 1,500, 486990 All Other Pipeline Transportation $34.5 million)74 

### Table 6 . 9 . Avoided Costs to Sales for Small Modifying Industrial GHG PSD Emission Sources

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard (effective August 11, 2008) Average

Cost Per Entity (2007$) Cost per

Entity for All Establish me nts (% ) Cost per

E ntity for <20 E mpl oyees (% ) Cost per

E ntity for 20 to 99 E mployees (% ) Cost per

E ntity 100 to 499 E mpl oyees (% ) Cost per

E ntity for 500 to 749 E mpl oyees (% ) Cost per

E ntity for 750 to 999 E mpl oyees (% ) Cost per

E ntity for 1,000 to 1,499 E mpl oyees (% ) Electricity Generating Units Electricity Generating

Units 22 1 $84,530 0.3% 4.7% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2%
Industrial Adipic Acid

Production 325199 1 , 000 $84 , 530 0.1% 3.0% 1.0% 0.3% NA 0.0% NA Industrial Aluminum Production 331312 1 , 000 $84 , 530 0.1% 34.6% NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Ammonia

Manufacturing 325311 1 , 000 $84 , 530 0.3% 4.3% 2.5% NA NA NA NA Industrial Cement Production 327310 750 $84 , 530 0.3% 2.7% 2.0% 0.4% NA NA 0.2% Industrial Electronics

Manufacturing 334 2 $84 , 530 0.3% 6.6% 1.1% 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% Industrial Ferroalloy Production 331112 750 $84 , 530 0 .1% NA NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Glass Production 327 500

– 1 , 000 $84 , 530 1.3% 8.1% 1.6% 0.9% 0.6% 0.9% 0.7% Industrial HCFC
- 22 Production 325120 1 , 000 $84 , 530 0.7% 15.1% 0.5% 2.1% NA NA NA Industrial Hydrogen Production 325120 1 , 000 $84 , 530 0.7% 15.1% 0. 5% 2.1% NA NA NA Industrial Iron and Steel

Production 331111 1 , 000 $84 , 530 0.2% 21.2% 1.2% 0.4% 0.1% NA NA Industrial Lead Production 3314 750

– 1 , 000 $84 , 530 0.3% 5.6% 0.6% 0.3% NA NA NA Industrial Lime Manufacturing 327410 500 $84 , 530 0.6% 23.3% 1.7% NA NA NA 0.3% Industrial Magnesium

Production 3314 750

– 1 , 000 $84 , 530 0.3% 5.6% 0.6% 0.3% NA NA NA Industrial Nitric Acid Production 325311 1,000 $84 , 530 0.3% 4.3% 2.5% NA NA NA 0.3% Industrial Petrochemical

Production 3251 500

– 1 , 000 $84 , 530 0.2% 2.5% 0.6% 0.2% 0.1% 0.3% NA Industrial Petroleum Refineries 324110 3 $84 , 530 0.0% 1.3% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% NA NA Industrial Phosphoric Acid

Production 325312 500 $84 , 530 0.1% 14.2% NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Pulp and Paper

Manufacturing 3221 750 $84 , 530 0.1% 5.6% 0.6% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% Industrial Silicon Carbide

Production 327910 500 $84 , 530 0.8% 6.6% 1.5% 0.5% NA NA NA Industrial Soda Ash

Manufacturing 325181 1,000 $84 , 530 0.1% 6.9% NA NA NA NA NA (continued)75 

### Table 6 . 9 . Avoided Costs to Sales for Small Modifying Industrial GHG PSD Emission Sources (continued)

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard (effective August 11, 2008) Average

Cost Per Entity (2007$) Cost per

Entity for All Establish me nts (% ) Cost per

E ntity for <20 E mpl oyees (% ) Cost per

E ntity fo r 20 to 99 E mpl oyees (% ) Cost per

E ntity 100 to 499 E mpl oyees (% ) Cost per

E ntity for 500 to 749 E mpl oyees (% ) Cost per

E ntity for 750 to 999 E mpl oyees (% ) Cost per

E ntity for 1,000 to 1,499 E mpl oyees (% ) Industrial Titanium Dioxide

Production 325188 1,00 0 $84 , 530 0.3% 6.0% 3.5% 0.9% NA NA NA Industrial Zinc Production 3314 750

– 1 , 000 $84 , 530 0.3% 5.6% 0.6% 0.3% NA NA 0.3% Industrial Ethanol Production 325193 1,000 $84 , 530 0.2% NA NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Food Processing 311 500

– 1 , 000 $84 , 530 0.4% 7.9% 1.0% 0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.1% Energy Underground Coal

Mines 21211 500 $84 , 530 0.4% 6.6% 1.0% 0.4% NA 0.3% NA Energy Oil and Natural Gas

Systems 211 500 $84 , 530 0.3% 5.2% 0.5% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% Energy Oil and Natural Gas

Systems 486 4 $84 , 530 0.4% 0.8% 3. 2% 2.6% NA NA NA Waste Treatment Landfills 562 $12.5 million $84 , 530 2.7% 12.2% 1.9% 0.9% 0.8% 0.6% 0.8% Waste Treatment MWCs 562 $12.5 million $84 , 530 2.7% 12.2% 1.9% 0.9% 0.8% 0.6% 0.8% Since the SBA ’ s business size definitions (http://www.sba.gov/siz e) apply to an establishment ’ s ultimate parent company, we assume in this analysis that the enterprise definition above is consistent with the concept of ultimate parent company that is typically used for Small Busine ss Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) screening analyses. 1 NAICS codes 221111, 221112, 221113, 221119, 221121, 221122

– A firm is small if, including its affiliates, it is primarily engaged in the g eneration, transmission, and/or distribution of electric energy for sale and its total electric output for the preceding fiscal year did not exceed 4 million megawatt hours. 2 500 to 1,500. For NAICS code 324110 : For purposes of Government pro curement, the petroleum refiner must be a concern that has no more than 1,500 em ployees nor pro duction greater than 125,000 barrels per calendar day total Operable Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation capacity. Capacity includes ow ned or leased facilities as well as facilities under a processing agreement or an arrangement such as an exchange agreement or a throughput. The total product to be delivered under the contract must be at least 90 percent refined by the successful bidder from either crude oil or bona fide feedstocks. 3 NAICS Subsectors 333, 334, 335 and 336 : For rebuilding machinery or equip ment on a factory basis, or equivalent, use the NAICS code for a newly manufactured product. Concerns performing major rebuilding or overhaul activities do not necessarily have to meet the criteri a for being a “ manufacturer” although the activities may be classified under a manufacturing NAICS code. Ordinary repair services or preservation are not considered rebuilding. 4 Subsector 486 : Pipeline Transportation (486110 Pipeline Transportation of Crude Oil 1,500, 486210 Pipeline Transportation of Natural Gas $7.0 million , 486910 Pipeline Transportation of Refined Petroleum Products 1,500, 486990 All Other Pipeline Transportation $34.5 million)76 

### Table 6 . 1 0 . Avoided Costs to Sales for Small New PSD Industrial GHG Sources

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard (effective August 11, 2008) Average

Cost per Entity (2007$) Cost per

Entity for All Enterprises Cost per

E ntity for <20 E mpl oyees Cost per

E ntity for 20 to 99 E mpl oyees Cost per

E ntity 100 to 499 E mpl oyees Cost per

E ntity for 500 to 749 E mpl oyees Cost per

E ntity for 750 to 999 E mpl oyees Cost per

E ntity for 1,000 to 1,499 E mpl oyees Electricity Generating Units Electricity Generating

Units 22 1 $13 0,880 0.5% 7. 2 % 0.7% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.2%

Industrial Adipic Acid Production 325199 1 , 000 $13 0,880 0.2% 4.7% 1.5% 0.5% NA 0.1% NA Industrial Aluminum Production 331312 1 , 000 $13 0,880 0.2% 53. 6 % NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Ammonia

Manufacturing 325311 1 , 000 $13 0,880 0.5% 6.7% 3.9% NA NA NA NA Industrial Cement Production 327310 750 $13 0,880 0.4% 4. 2 % 3.2% 0
. 5 % NA NA 0.3% Industrial Electronics

Manufacturing 334 2 $13 0,880 0.5% 10. 2 % 1.7% 0.5% 0.3% 0. 2 % 0.2% Industrial Ferroalloy Production 331112 750 $13 0,880 0.2% NA NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Glass Production 327 500

– 1 , 000 $13 0,880 2.0% 12. 6 % 2. 4 % 1.4% 1. 0% 1. 4 % 1.0% Industrial HCFC
- 22 Production 325120 1 , 000 $13 0,880 1.1% 23. 3 % 0.8% 3.2% NA NA NA Industrial Hydrogen Production 325120 1 , 000 $13 0,880 1.1% 23. 3 % 0.8% 3.2% NA NA NA Industrial Iron and Steel

Production 331111 1 , 000 $13 0,880 0.3% 3 2.9 % 1.8% 0.7% 0.2% NA NA Industrial Lead Production 3314 750

– 1 , 000 $13 0,880 0.5% 8.7% 1.0% 0.5% NA NA 0.4% Industrial Lime Manufacturing 327410 500 $13 0,880 0.9% 36. 1 % 2.7% NA NA NA NA Industrial Magnesium Production 3314 750

– 1 , 000 $13 0,880 0.5% 8.7% 1.0% 0.5% NA NA 0.4% Industrial Nitric Acid Production 325311 1,000 $13 0,880 0.5% 6.7% 3.9% NA NA NA NA Industrial Petrochemical

Production 3251 500

– 1 , 000 $13 0,880 0.2% 3.9% 0.9% 0.4% 0.2% 0.4% 0.3% Industrial Petroleum Refineries 324110 3 $13 0,880 0.0% 2.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% NA NA Industrial Phosphoric Acid

Production 325312 500 $13 0,880 0.1% 22. 0 % NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Pulp and Paper

Manufacturing 3221 750 $13 0,880 0.1% 8.7% 1.0% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% Industrial Silicon Carbide

Production 327910 500 $13 0,880 1. 2% 10. 2 % 2.3% 0.8% NA NA NA Industrial Soda Ash

Manufacturing 325181 1,000 $13 0,880 0.2% 10. 7 % NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Titanium Dioxide

Production 325188 1,000 $13 0,880 0.4% 9.3% 5. 4 % 1.3% NA NA NA Industrial Zinc Production 3314 750

– 1 , 000 $13 0,880 0. 5% 8.7% 1.0% 0.5% NA NA 0.4% (continued)77 

### Ta ble 6 . 1 0 . Avoided Costs to Sales for Small New PSD Industrial GHG Sources (continued)

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard (effective August 11, 2008) Average

Cost per Entity (2007$) Cost per

Entity f or All Enterprises Cost per

E ntity for <20 E mpl oyees Cost per

E ntity for 20 to 99 E mpl oyees Cost per

E ntity 100 to 499 E mpl oyees Cost per

E ntity for 500 to 749 E mpl oyees Cost per

E ntity for 750 to 999 E mpl oyees Cost per

E ntity for 1,000 to 1,499 E mpl oyees Industrial Ethanol Production 325193 1,000 $13 0,880 0.4% NA NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Food Processing 311 500

– 1 , 000 $13 0,880 0.6% 12. 3 % 1.5% 0.4% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% Energy Underground Coal

Mines 21211 500 $13 0,880 0.7% 10.2% 1.5% 0.5% NA 0.5% NA Energy Oi l and Natural Gas

Systems 211 500 $13 0,880 0.5% 8.1% 0.8% 0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.1% Energy Oil and Natural Gas

Systems 486 4 $13 0,880 0.7% 1.2% 4.9% 4.0% NA NA NA Waste Treatment Landfills 562 $12.5 million $13 0,880 4.2% 1 8.9 % 2.9% 1. 3 % 1.2% 1. 0 % 1.3% Waste Treatment MWCs 562 $12.5 million $13 0,880 4.2% 1 8.9 % 2.9% 1. 3 % 1.2% 1. 0 % 1.3%
Since the SBA ’ s business size definitions (http://www.sba.gov/size) apply to an establishment ’ s ultimate parent company, we assume in this analysis that the enterprise definiti on above is consistent with the concept of ultimate parent company that is typically used for Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) screening analyses. 1 NAICS codes 221111, 221112, 221113, 221119, 221121, 221122

– A firm is small if , including its affiliates, it is primarily engaged in the g eneration, transmission, and/or distribution of electric energy for sale and its total electric output for the preceding fiscal year did not exceed 4 million megawatt hours. 2 500 to 1,500. For NAICS code 324110 : For purposes of Government pro curement, the petroleum refiner must be a concern that has no more than 1,500 em ployees nor production greater than 125,000 barrels per calendar day total Operable Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation capacity. Capacity includes ow ned or leased facilities as well as facilities under a processing agreement or an arrangement such as an exchange agreement or a throughput. The total product to be delivered under the contract must be at least 90 percent refined by the successful bidder from either crude oil or bona fide feedstocks. 3 NAICS Subsectors 333, 334, 335 and 336 : For rebuilding machinery or equipment on a factory basis, or equivalent, use the NAICS code for a newly manufactured product. Concerns performin g major rebuilding or overhaul activities do not necessarily have to meet the criteria for being a “ manufacturer” although the activities may be classified under a manufacturing NAICS code. Ordinary repair services or preservation are not considered rebuil ding. 4 Subsector 486 : Pipeline Transportation (486110 Pipeline Transportation of Crude Oil 1,500, 486210 Pipeline Transportation of Natural Gas $7. 0 million , 486910 Pipeline Transportation of Refined Petroleum Products 1,500, 486990 All Other Pipeline Transportation $34.5 million)78 

### Table 6 - 1 1 . Avoided Title V Permitting Costs to Sales for Permit Revisions D ue to GHG

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard (effective August 11, 2008) Average Cost

Per Entity ( 2007$/entity) Cost per

Entity for All Enterprises Cost per

Entity for Size <20 E mpl oyees Cost per

Entity for Size 20 to 99 E mpl oyees Cost per

Entity for Size 100 to 499 E mpl oyees Cost per

Entity for Size 500 to 749 E mpl oyees Cost per

Entity for Size 750 to 999 E mpl oyees Cost per

Entity For Size 1,000 to 1,499 E mpl oyees Electri city Generating Unites Electricity Generating

Units 22 1 $ 1,677 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Industrial Adipic Acid

Production 325199 1 , 000 $ 1,677 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% NA 0.0% NA Industrial Aluminum Production 331 312 1 , 000 $ 1,677 0.0% 0.7% NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Ammonia

Manufacturing 325311 1 , 000 $ 1,677 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% NA NA NA NA Industrial Cement Production 327310 750 $ 1,677 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% NA NA 0.0% Industrial Electronics

Manufacturing 334 2 $ 1,677 0.0 % 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Industrial Ferroalloy Production 331112 750 $ 1,677 0.0% NA NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Glass Production 327 500

– 1 , 000 $ 1,677 0.0% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Industrial HCFC
- 22 Production 325120 1 , 000 $ 1,677 0.0% 0.3% 0.0 % 0.0% NA NA NA Industrial Hydrogen Production 325120 1 , 000 $ 1,677 0.0% 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% NA NA NA Industrial Iron and Steel

Production 331111 1 , 000 $ 1,677 0.0% 0.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% NA NA Industrial Lead Production 3314 750

– 1 , 000 $ 1,677 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% NA NA 0.0% Industrial Lime Manufacturing 327410 500 $ 1,677 0.0% 0.5% 0.0% NA NA NA NA Industrial Magnesium

Production 3314 750

– 1 , 000 $ 1,677 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% NA NA 0.0% Industrial Nitric Acid Production 325311 1,000 $ 1,677 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% NA NA NA NA Industrial Petrochemical

Production 3251 500

– 1 , 000 $ 1,677 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Industrial Petroleum Refineries 324110 3 $ 1,677 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% NA NA (continued)79 

### Table 6 . 1 1 . Avoided Title V Permitting Costs to Sales for Permit Revisions D ue to GHG (continued)

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard (effective August 11, 2008) Average Cost

Per Entity ( 2007$/entity) Cost per

Entity for All Enterprises Cost per

Entity for Size <20 E mpl oyees Cost per

Entity for Size 20 to 99 E mployees Cost per

Entity for Size 100 to 499 E mpl oyees Cost per

Entity for Size 500 to 749 E mpl oyees Cost per

Entity for Size 750 to 999 E mpl oyees Cost per

Entity For Size 1,000 to 1,499 E mpl oyees Industrial Phosphoric Acid

Production 325312 500 $1,677 0.0 % 0.3% NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Pulp and Paper

Manufacturing 3221 750 $ 1,667 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Industrial Silicon Carbide

Production 327910 500 $ 1,677 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% NA NA NA Industrial Soda Ash

Manufacturing 325181 1,000 $ 1,677 0 .0% 0.1% NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Titanium Dioxide

Production 325188 1,000 $ 1,677 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% NA NA NA Industrial Zinc Production 3314 750

– 1 , 000 $ 1,677 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% NA NA 0.0% Industrial Ethanol Production 325193 1,000 $ 1,677 0.0% NA NA NA NA NA NA Industrial Food Processing 311 500

– 1 , 000 $ 1,677 0.0% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Energy Underground Coal

Mines 21211 500 $ 1,677 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% NA 0.0% NA Energy Oil and Natural Gas

Systems 211 500 $ 1,677 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Energy Oil and Natural Gas

Systems 486 4 $ 1,677 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% NA NA NA Waste Treatment Landfills 562 $12.5 million $ 1,677 0.1% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% (continued)80 

### Table 6 . 1 1 . Avoided Title V Permitting Costs to Sales for Permit Revi sions D ue to GHG (continued)

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard (effective August 11, 2008) Average Cost

Per Entity ( 2007$/entity) Cost per

Entity for All Enterprises Cost per

Entity for Size <20 E mpl oyees Cost per

Entity for Size 20 to 99 E mp loyees Cost per

Entity for Size 100 to 499 E mpl oyees Cost per

Entity for Size 500 to 749 E mpl oyees Cost per

Entity for Size 750 to 999 E mpl oyees Cost per

Entity For Size 1,000 to 1,499 E mpl oyees Waste Treatment MWCs 562 $12.5 million $ 1,677 0.1% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Since the SBA ’ s business size definitions (http://www.sba.gov/size) apply to an establishment ’ s ultimate parent company, we assume in this analysis that the enterprise definition above is consistent with the concept of ultimate parent com pany that is typically used for Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) screening analyses. 1 NAICS codes 221111, 221112, 221113, 221119, 221121, 221122

– A firm is small if, including its affiliates, it is primarily engaged in the g eneration, transmission, and/or distribution of electric energy for sale and its total electric output for the preceding fiscal year did not exceed 4 million megawatt hours. 2 500 to 1,500. For NAICS code 324110 : For purposes of Government pro curement , the petroleum refiner must be a concern that has no more than 1,500 em ployees nor production greater than 125,000 barrels per calendar day total Operable Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation capacity. Capacity includes ow ned or leased facilities as well as facilities under a processing agreement or an arrangement such as an exchange agreement or a throughput. The total product to be delivered under the contract must be at least 90 percent refined by the successful bidder from either crude oil or bona fide f eedstocks. 3 NAICS Subsectors 333, 334, 335 and 336 : For rebuilding machinery or equipment on a factory basis, or equivalent, use the NAICS code for a newly manufactured product. Concerns performing major rebuilding or overhaul activities do not necessari ly have to meet the criteria for being a “ manufacturer” although the activities may be classified under a manufacturing NAICS code. Ordinary repair services or preservation are not considered rebuilding. 4 Subsector 486 : Pipeline Transportation (486110 Pipeline Transportation of Crude Oil 1,500, 486210 Pipeline Transportation of Natural Gas $7.0 million , 486910 Pipeline Transportation of Refined Petroleum Products 1,500, 486990 All Other Pipeline Transportation $34.5 million)81 

### Table 6 . 12 . Title V Avoide d Costs for Small New Commercial Sources of GHG Emissions Compared to Annual Sales Revenue

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard (effective August 11, 2008) Average Cost

Per Entity ($1 , 000/entity) Avoided

Cost to Average Sales Revenues for All Ent erprises Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size <20 E mpl oyees Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size 20 to 99 E mpl oyees Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size 100 to 499 E mpl oyees Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size 500 to 749 E mpl oyees Avoided

Cost to Sales Reve nues Size 750 to 999 E mpl oyees Avoided Cost

to Sales Revenues Size 1,000 to 1,499 E mpl oyees Commercial Education 61 7.0

– 35.0 $23,175 0.82% 6.12% 1.05% 0.34% 0.19% 0.12% 0.10% Commercial Enclosed M all 531120 7 $23,175 1.35% 2.45% 0.38% 0.21% 0.13% 0.19% 0 .10% Commercial Food S ales $23,175 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Commercial Food S ervice 722 7.0

–20.5 $23,175 3.12% 7.25% 1.87% 1.49% 1.73% 1.83% 1.75% Commercial Inpatient H ealth C are 622 34.5 $23,175 0.03% 1.21% 0.41% 0.12% 0.05% 0.04% 0.02% Commercial Labo ratory 541380 12 $23,175 1.17% 3.87% 0.82% 0.54% 0.32% 0.30% 0.79% Commercial Laboratory 5417 7 $23,175 0.45% 2.69% 0.39% 0.15% 0.12% 0.13% 0.12% Commercial Lodging 721 7 $23,175 1.01% 5.14% 1.14% 0.46% 0.41% 0.20% 0.35% Commercial Nonrefrigerated

Wareh ouse 49311 25.5 $23,175 1.06% 3.08% 0.85% 0.54% 1.42% 0.79% 0.67% Commercial Nursing 623 7.0

– 13.5 $23,175 1.08% 7.43% 1.45% 0.87% 0.95% 0.88% 0.65% Commercial Office 531120 7 $23,175 1.35% 2.45% 0.38% 0.21% 0.13% 0.19% 0.10% Commercial Other 81 7.0

–25.0 $23,175 3.49% 6.15% 1.04% 0.56% 0.67% 0.72% 0.90% Commercial Outpatient H ealth C are 621 7.0

– 34.5 $23,175 1.94% 3.61% 0.82% 0.60% 0.54% 0.58% 0.42% Commercial Public A ssembly 71 7 $23,175 1.50% 4.26% 1.00% 0.25% 0.19% NA 0.12% Commercial Public O rder and

S afety $23,175 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Commercial Refrigerated

Warehouse 49312 25.5 $23,175 0.46% 2.62% 0.62% 0.38% NA NA 0.36% Commercial Religious Worship 813110 7 $23,175 4.19% 9.22% 1.09% 0.21% 0.16% 0.05% 0.06% Commercial Retail O ther than M all 44

–45 7.0

–29.0 $23,175 0.72% 2.39% 0.34% 0.27% 0.42% 0.60% 0.61% Commercial Service 81 7.0

–25.0 $23,175 3.49% 6.15% 1.04% 0.56% 0.67% 0.72% 0.90% Commercial Strip S hopping M all 531120 7 $23,175 1.35% 2.45% 0.38% 0.21% 0.13% 0.19% 0.10% (continued)82 

### Table 6 . 12 . Title V Avoided Costs for Small New Commercial Sources of GHG Emissions Compared to Annual Sales Revenue

(continued)

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard (effective August 11, 2008) Average Cost

Per Entity ($1 , 000/entity) Avoided

Cost to Average Sales Revenues for All Enterprises Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size <20 E mpl oyees Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size 20 to 99 E mpl oyees Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size 100 to 499 E mpl oyees Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size 500 to 749 E mp loyees Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size 750 to 999 E mpl oyees Avoided Cost

to Sales Revenues Size 1,000 to 1,499 E mpl oyees Residential Residential 531110 7 $23,175 2.33% 3.23% 0.70% 0.84% 0.81% NA NA The Census Bureau defines an enterprise as a busines s organization consisting of one or more domestic establishments that were specified under common ownership or control. The enterprise and the establishment are the same for single

- establishment firms. Each multi

- establishment company forms one enterprise

—the enterprise employment and annual payroll is summed from the associated establishments. Enterprise size designations are determined by the summed employment of all associated establishments. Since the SBA ’ s business size definitions (http://www.sba.gov/size ) apply to an establishment ’ s ultimate parent company, we assume in this analysis that the enterprise definition above is consistent with the concept of ultimate parent company that is typically used for SBREFA s creening analyses. NAICS code 611519 : Job Corps Centers. For classifying a Federal procurement, the purpose of the solicitation must be for the management and operation of a U.S. Department of Labor Job Corps Center. The activities involved include admissi ons activities, life skills training, educational activities, comprehensive career preparation activities, career development activities, career transition activities, as well as the management and support functions and services needed to operate and maintain the facility. For SBA assistance as small business concern, other than for Federal Government procurements, a concern must be primarily engaged in providing the services to operate and maintain Federal Job Corps Centers
. NAICS code 541711 and 541712 : F or research and development contracts requiring the delivery of a manufactured product, the appropriate size standard is that of the manufacturing industry.83 

### Table 6 . 13 . Avoided Costs for Small Modifying Commerc ial PSD GHG Emission Sources Compared to An nual Sales Revenue

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard (effective August 11, 2008) Average Cost

Per Entity ($1 , 000/entity) Avoided

Cost to Average Sales Revenues for All Enterprises Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size <20 Employees Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size 20 to 99 Employees Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size 100 to 499 Employees Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size 500 to 749 Employees Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size 750 to 999 Employees Avoided Cost

to Sales Revenues Size 1 ,000 to 1,499 Employees Commercial Education 61 7.0

– 35.0 $59,152 2.10% 15.61% 2.67% 0.87% 0.49% 0.31% 0.25% Commercial Enclosed Mall 531120 7 $59,152 3.45% 6.26% 0.96% 0.53% 0.34% 0.50% 0.25% Commercial Food Sales $59,152 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Commerc ial Food Service 722 7.0

–20.5 $59,152 7.97% 18.52% 4.78% 3.80% 4.42% 4.66% 4.46% Commercial Inpatient Health Care 622 34.5 $59,152 0.08% 3.09% 1.05% 0.30% 0.13% 0.09% 0.06% Commercial Laboratory 541380 12 $59,152 2.98% 9.88% 2.08% 1.38% 0.83% 0.76% 2.01% Commercial Laboratory 5417 7 $59,152 1.15% 6.88% 1.01% 0.38% 0.31% 0.34% 0.32% Commercial Lodging 721 7 $59,152 2.59% 13.12% 2.91% 1.16% 1.05% 0.51% 0.89% Commercial Nonrefrigerated

Warehouse 49311 25.5 $59,152 2.70% 7.87% 2.17% 1.37% 3.62% 2.01% 1.71% Commercial Nursing 623 7.0

– 13.5 $59,152 2.76% 18.96% 3.70% 2.22% 2.43% 2.25% 1.65% Commercial Office 531120 7 $59,152 3.45% 6.26% 0.96% 0.53% 0.34% 0.50% 0.25% Commercial Other 81 7.0

–25.0 $59,152 8.91% 15.71% 2.66% 1.43% 1.71% 1.84% 2.28% Commercial Outpatient Health Care 621 7.0

– 34.5 $59,152 4.95% 9.20% 2.08% 1.54% 1.38% 1.49% 1.08% Commercial Public Assembly 71 7 $59,152 3.84% 10.88% 2.55% 0.63% 0.48% NA 0.31% Commercial Public Order and Safety $59,152 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Commercial Refrigerat ed Warehouse 49312 25.5 $59,152 1.17% 6.69% 1.58% 0.97% NA NA 0.92% Commercial Religious Worship 813110 7 $59,152 10.68% 23.53% 2.77% 0.54% 0.40% 0.13% 0.16% Commercial Retail Other than Mall 44
- 45 7.0

–29.0 $59,152 1.84% 6.09% 0.88% 0.69% 1.08% 1.52% 1.5 6% Commercial Service 81 7.0

–25.0 $59,152 8.91% 15.71% 2.66% 1.43% 1.71% 1.84% 2.28% Commercial Strip Shopping Mall 531120 7 $59,152 3.45% 6.26% 0.96% 0.53% 0.34% 0.50% 0.25% (continued)84 

### Table 6 . 13 . Avoided Costs for Small Modifying Commercial PSD GHG Emission Sources Compared to Annual Sales Revenue

(continued)

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard (effective August 11, 2008) Average Cost

Per Entity ($1,000/entity) Avoided

Cost to Average Sales Revenues for All Enterprises Avoided

Cost to Sal es Revenues Size <20 Employees Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size 20 to 99 Employees Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size 100 to 499 Employees Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size 500 to 749 Employees Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size 750 to 999 Empl oyees Avoided Cost

to Sales Revenues Size 1,000 to 1,499 Employees Residential Residential 531110 7 $59,152 5.95% 8.25% 1.78% 2.15% 2.07% NA NA The Census Bureau defines an enterprise as a business organization consisting of one or more domestic establi shments that were specified under common ownership or control. The enterprise and the establishment are the same for single

- establishment firms. Each multi

- establishment company forms one enterprise

—the enterprise employment and annual payroll is summed from

the associated establishments. Enterprise size designations are determined by the summed employment of all associated esta blishments. Since the SBA ’ s business size definitions (http://www.sba.gov/size) apply to an establishment ’ s ultimate parent company , we assume in this analysis that the enterprise definition above is consistent with the concept of ultimate parent company that is typically used for SBREFA screening analyses. NAICS code 611519 : Job Corps Centers. For classifying a Federal procurement, the purpose of the solicitation must be for the management and operation of a U.S. Department of Labor Job Corps Center. The activities involved include admissions activities, life skills training, educational activities, comprehensive career preparation activities, career development activities, career transition activities, as well as the management and support functions and services needed to operate and maintain the facility. For SBA assistance as small business concern, other than for Federal Government procurements, a concern must be primarily engaged in providing the services to operate and maintain Federal Job Corps Centers
. NAICS code 541711 and 541712 : For research and development contracts requiring the delivery of a manufactured product, the appropriate size standard is that of the manufacturing industry.85 

### Table 6 . 14 . Avoided Co sts to Small PSD New Commerci al GHG Emission Sources

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard (effective August 11, 2008) Average Cost

Per Entity ($1000/entity) Avoi ded

Cost to Average Sales Revenues for All Enterprises Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size <20 employees Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size 20 to 99 employees Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size 100 to 499 employees Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size 50 0 to 749 employees Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size 750 to 999 employees Avoided Cost

to Sales Revenues Size 1,000 to 1,499 employees Commercial Education 61 7.0

– 35.0 $82, 327 2.92% 21.74% 3.72% 1.21% 0.68% 0.43% 0.34% Commercial Enclosed M all 531120 7 $82,3 2 7 4.80% 8.71% 1.34% 0.74% 0.47% 0.69% 0.35% Commercial Food S ales $82,3 2 7 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Commercial Food S ervice 722 7.0

–20.5 $82,3 2 7 11.09% 25.78% 6.65% 5.29% 6.15% 6.49% 6.21% Commercial Inpatient H ealth C are 622 34.5 $82,3 2 7 0.11% 4.3 0% 1.46% 0.42% 0.18% 0.13% 0.08% Commercial Laboratory 541380 12 $82,3 2 7 4.14% 13.76% 2.90% 1.92% 1.15% 1.06% 2.80% Commercial Laboratory 5417 7 $82,3 2 7 1.59% 9.57% 1.40% 0.53% 0.42% 0.48% 0.44% Commercial Lodging 721 7 $82,3 2 7 3.60% 18.26% 4.05% 1.62% 1.46% 0.71% 1.23% Commercial Nonrefrigerated

Warehouse 49311 25.5 $82,3 27 3.76% 10.96% 3.02% 1.91% 5.04% 2.79% 2.38% Commercial Nursing 623 7.0

– 13.5 $82,3 2 7 3.84% 26.40% 5.15% 3.09% 3.38% 3.13% 2.30% Commercial Office 531120 7 $82,3 2 7 4.80% 8.71% 1.34% 0.74% 0.47% 0.69% 0.35% Commercial Other 81 7.0

–25.0 $82,3 2 7 12.41% 21.87% 3.70% 2.00% 2.38% 2.56% 3.18% Commercial Outpatient H ealth C are 621 7.0

– 34.5 $82,3 2 7 6.89% 12.81% 2.90% 2.14% 1.93% 2.08% 1.51% Commercial Public A ssembly 71 7 $82,3 2 7 5.35% 15.1 5% 3.55% 0.87% 0.67% NA 0.43% Commercial Public O rder and S afety $82,3 2 7 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Commercial Refrigerated W arehouse 49312 25.5 $82,3 2 7 1.63% 9.31% 2.20% 1.35% NA NA 1.28% Commercial Religious Worship 813110 7 $82,3 2 7 14.87% 32.77% 3.86% 0.7 5% 0.56% 0.18% 0.22% Commercial Retail O ther than M all 44
- 45 7.0

–29.0 $82,3 2 7 2.57% 8.48% 1.22% 0.97% 1.50% 2.12% 2.17% Commercial Service 81 7.0

–25.0 $82,3 2 7 12.41% 21.87% 3.70% 2.00% 2.38% 2.56% 3.18% Commercial Strip S hopping M all 531120 7 $82,3 2 7 4. 80% 8.71% 1.34% 0.74% 0.47% 0.69% 0.35% (continued)86 

### Table 6 . 14 . Avoided Costs to Small PSD New Commercial GHG Emission Sources (continued)

Sector Source Category NAICS SBA Size Standard (effective August 11, 2008) Average Cost

Per Entity ($1000/entity) Avoided

Cost to Average Sales Revenues for All Enterprises Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size <20 employees Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size 20 to 99 employees Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size 100 to 499 employees Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Siz e 500 to 749 employees Avoided

Cost to Sales Revenues Size 750 to 999 employees Avoided Cost

to Sales Revenues Size 1,000 to 1,499 employees Residential Residential 531110 7 $82,3 2 7 8.29% 11.49% 2.48% 2.99% 2.89% NA NA The Census Bureau defines an enter prise as a business organization consisting of one or more domestic establishments that were specified under common ownership or control. The enterprise and the establishment are the same for single

- establishment firms. Each multi

- establishment company forms one enterprise

—the enterprise employment and annual payroll is summed from the associated establishments. Enterprise size designations are determined by the summed employment of all associ ated establishments. Since the SBA ’ s business size definitions (http://www.sba.gov/size) apply to an establishment ’ s ultimate parent company, we assume in this analysis that the enterprise definition above is consistent with the concept of ultimate parent company that is typically used for SBREFA screening analyses. NAI CS code 611519 : Job Corps Centers. For classifying a Federal procurement, the purpose of the solicitation must be for the management and operation of a U.S. Department of Labor Job Corps Center. The activities involved include admissions activities, life s kills training, educational activities, comprehensive career preparation activities, career development activities, career transition activities, as well as the management and support functions and services needed to operate and maintain the facility. For SBA assistance as small business concern, other than for Federal Government procurements, a concern must be primarily engaged in providing the services to operate and maintain Federal Job Corps Centers
. NAICS code 541711 and 541712 : For research and develo pment contracts requiring the delivery of a manufactured product, the appropriate size standard is that of the manufacturing industry.

### 87 Section 7 Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 7 .1 Executive Order 12866 - Regulatory Planning and Review Under sectio n 3(f)(1) of Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is an "economically significant regulatory

action” because it is likely to have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more. Accordingly , EPA submitted this ac tion to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under EO 12866 and any changes made in response to OMB recommendations have been documented in the docket for this action. In addition, EPA prepared an anal ys is of the potential costs and benefit s associated with this action. This analysis is contained in the RIA for this final rule. A copy of the anal ys is is available in the docket for this action and the analysis is briefl y summarized in section VII of this preamble. This rule uses a phased

- in approach for requiring larger sources of GHG emissions to comply with title V operating permit and PSD statutory requirements, essentially lifting this burden for a period of at least 6 years for a large number of sources of GHG. Thus, this rule provides regulatory

relief rather than regulatory requirements for these GHG sources. For sources of GHG that will be required to obtain title V permits and/or comply with PSD requirements, there are no direct economic burdens or costs as a result of this final r ule, because these requirements are not imposed as a result of this rulemaking. Statutory requirements to obtain a title V operating permit or to adhere to PSD requirements are already mandated by

the CAA and b y existing rules, not by this rule. As a result, this Tailoring rule annual effect on the economy will be positive because it will result in billions of dollars of regulatory relief during the phase

- in period. 7 .2 Paperwork Reduction Act This action does not impose any new information collection burden. Instead, this action will significantl y reduce costs incurred b y sources and permitting authorities relative to the costs that would be incurred if EPA did not revise the rule. Based on our revised GHG threshold data anal ys is, we estimate that over 80,000 new and modified facilities per year would be subject to PSD review based on applying a GHG emissions threshold of 100/250 tpy using a CO 2 

### e metric. This is compared to 280 PSD permits currently issued per year, which is an increase of more than 280

- fold. Similarly , for title V, we estimate that over six million new sources would be

### 88

affected at the 100

- tpy

threshold for GHGs using the CO 2 

### e metric. By increasing the volume of permits by

over 400 times, the administrative burden would be unmanageable without this rule. However, OMB has previously approved the information collection requirements contained in the existing regulations for PSD ( see, e.g. , 40 CFR 52.21) and title V ( see 40 CFR parts 70 and 71) under the provisions of the Paperwork Reductio n Act , 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq
. and has assigned OMB control number 2060

- 0003 and OMB control number 2060

- 0336. The OMB control numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. 7 .3 Regulatory Flexibility Act The Regulatory

Flexibility

Ac t (RFA) generall y requires an agency to prepare a regulatory

flexibility

analysis of any

rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the APA or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant eco nomic 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 this final action on small entities, small entity is defin ed as: (1) a small business that is a small industrial entity as defined in the U.S. SBA size standards ( see 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; or (3) a small organization that is any not - for

-profit enterprise that is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field. After considering the economic impacts of this final rule on small entities, the Administrator certifie d that this final action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. In determining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, the impact of conc ern is any significant adverse economic impact on small entities, since the primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility anal ys es is to identify

and address regulatory

alternatives “which minimize any significant economic impact of the rule on small entities.” 5 USC 603 and 604. Thus, an agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, or otherwise has a positive economic effect on all of the small entities subject to the rule. We have therefore concluded that this final rule will relieve the regulatory burden for most affected small entities associated with the major PSD and title V operating permits

### 89

programs for new or modified major sources that emit GHGs, including small businesses. This is because this rule raises the major source applicability thresholds for these programs for the sources that emit GHGs. As a result, the program changes provided in this rule are not expected to result in a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 7 .4 Unfunded Mandates Reform Act This 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 1 year. Onl y those few states whose permitting authorities do not implement the federal PSD and title V rules by

reference in their SIPs will have a small increase in burden. These states will have to amend their c orresponding SIPs to incorporate the new applicability thresholds, since the burden reducing thresholds that we are finalizing with this rule will not otherwise appl y to the PSD and title V programs. Thus, this rule is not subject to the requirements of s ections 202 or 205 of UMRA. This rule is also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of UMRA because it contains no regulatory

requirements that might significantly or uniquel y affect small governments. As discussed earlier, this rule is expected to result in cost savings and an administrative burden reduction for all permitting authorities and permittees, including small governments. 7 .5 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 government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132. These final amendments will ultimately simplify and reduce the burden on state and local agencies associated with implementing the PSD and title V operating permits programs, by providing that a source whose GHG emissions are below the proposed levels will not have to obtain a PSD permit or title V permit. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply

to this action. In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA policy to promote communications between EPA and state and local governments, EPA specifically solic ited comment on the proposed rule from state and local officials.

### 90

7 .6 Executive Order 13175 - Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments Subject to the Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) EPA may not issue a regulation that has tribal implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless the federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by tribal governments, or EPA consult s with tribal officials earl y in the process of developing the proposed regulation and develops a tribal summary impact statement. EPA has concluded that this action may have tribal implications. However, it will neither impose substantial direct compli ance costs on tribal governments, nor preempt Tribal law. There are no tribal authorities currentl y issuing major NSR permits; therefore, it will not currently impose direct compliance costs on tribal governments. EPA consulted with tribal officials earl y in the process of developing this regulation to allow them to have meaningful and timel y input into its development by publishing an ANPR that included PSD GHG tailoring options for regulating GHGs under the CAA. (73 FR 44354, July 30, 2008) As a result of the ANPR, EPA received several comments from tribal officials on differing PSD GHG tailoring options presented in the ANPR which were considered in the proposal and this final rule. Additionally , we also specificall y solicited comment from tribal off icials on the proposed rule (74 FR 55292, October 27, 2009). As required b y s ection 7(a) of Executive Order 13175, EPA’s Tribal Consultation Official has certified that the requirements of the Executive Order have been met in a meaningful and timely

mann er. A copy

of the certification is included in the docket for this action. 7 .7 Executive Order 13045 - Protection of Children from Environmental Health and Safety Risks EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as appl ying only to those regul atory

actions that concern health or safety risks, such that the anal ys is 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.

### 91

7 .8 Executive Order 13211 - Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use This action is not a “significant energy action” as defined in Executive Order 13211(66 FR 28355 (May

22, 2001)), because it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply , distribution, or use of energy . Further, we have concluded that this rule is not likely to have any adverse energy

effects because this action would not create any new requirements for sources in the energy

supply , distribution, or use sectors. 7 . 9 N ational Technology Transfer and Advancement Act Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 ("NTTAA"), Public Law No. 104

- 113, 12(d) (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 b y voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and applic able voluntary

consensus standards. This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards. 7 . 10 Executive Order 12898

– Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low - Income Populations Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 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 concluded that it is not practicable to determine whether there would be disproportionately

high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority and/or low income populations from this rule

. This rule is necessary in order to allow for the continued implementation of permitting requirements established in the statute. Specifically, without this rule, the CAA permitting programs (PSD and Title V) would become overwhelmed and

### 92

unmanageable b y the millions of GHG sources that would become newl y subject to them. This would result in severe impairment of the functioning of these programs with potentially adverse human health and environmental effects nationwide. Under this rule and the legal doctrines of absurd results, administrative necessity , and one

- step - at - a - time, EPA is ensuring that the CAA permitting programs continue to operate b y limiting their applicability to the maximum number of sources the programs can possibly handle. This approach is consistent with congressional intent as it allows PSD applicability to at least the largest sources initially , at least to as many more sources as possible, and as promptly as possible over time. By doing so, this rule allows for the maximum degree o f environmental protection possible while providing regulatory relief for the unmanageable burden that would otherwise exist. Therefore, we believe it is not practicable to identify

and address disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority populations and low income populations in the United States under this final rule. 7 .1 1 Congressional Review Act The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq ., as added b y the Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generall y provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency

promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a cop y of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will subm it 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 effec t until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register . This action is a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

### 93 Section 8 Limitations and Uncertainties The benefits, costs and economic impacts estimated in this RIA are subject to limitation s and uncertainties. The benefits of this rule are the regulatory relief provided to small sources of GHG and permitting authorities. Regulatory relief estimates are provided for the final rule Steps 1, 2 and 3 on an annual basis as well as for the full phase

- in period. The benefits or avoided permitting are based upon the best data available currentl y regarding sources affected and burden cost estimates but are subject to uncertainties. Benefit Estimate Limitations and Uncertainties Uncertainties exi st in the affected source counts at different thresholds used to estimate regulatory

relief due to the absence of a comprehensive data set of facility

- level GHG emissions across all sectors on which to base the number of facilities subject to title V and P SD permitting at alternative regulatory

thresholds. These affected source counts are multiplied by the permit burden cost estimates to derive the benefits (regulatory relief) estimates for the rule. Specific uncertainties in the estimates of affected sources, burden estimates and other limitations of the benefits anal ys is are discussed below. a. Uncertainties in Estimates of Affected Sources In order to estimate the number of facilities that exceed a given GHG threshold (such as a 100 or 250 tpy

CO2 e emis sion threshold for baseline anal ys is) , it is necessary to have emissions inventory data at the facility

or building level, including , and particularl y for lower threshold scenarios, numerous small sources in the residential and commercial sectors (e.g., ap artment buildings and office buildings). Historically , however, EPA has not collected sector - wide, facility

- level information for GHG emissions under the CAA (with the exception of information from electric generating units required to report CO2 emissio ns under the Acid Rain Program reporting requirements). To date, national EPA inventories of GHG sources have primaril y focused on ‘top

- down’ estimates of GHG emissions from sectors and sources, and not facility

level estimates

. As a result, many of the uncertainties described here result from the absence of a comprehensive data set of facility- level GHG emissions across all sectors. For residential, commercial, and smaller manufacturing operations, our current anal ys is relies on sample facility

datas ets and ‘top

- down’ sector data (e.g., national fuel consumption statistics and/or building characteristics). There are inherent uncertainties in developing source

### 94

counts from the allocation of these nationall y aggregated statistics

. The allocation facto rs we used, based on U.S. Energy Information Administration statistical sampling procedures and energy consumption statistics , are likel y the best available to estimate the population of residential , commercial , and small manufacturing sources exceeding di fferent GHG thresholds. However, uncertainties may result in either overestimating or underestimating GHG emissions for a given individual facility

. It is worth noting that our estimates for the largest GHG emitting sources, such as electric utilities an d refineries, are derived from bottom

- up calculations of individual facility

/building emissions so that there is increased certainty in evaluating and comparing the facility

counts at the higher GHG threshold scenarios where residential and commercial sources are not highly affected. Although there are different levels of uncertainty in our facility level estimates across sectors, we do believe that the data are sufficientl y robust to use in the aggregate to assess national permitting level impacts. EP A’s estimate of affected sources is based on their potential to emit emissions, as opposed to actual emission levels. PTE is defined as the maximum capacity of a stationary source to emit a pollutant under its physical and operational design, including certain legal limitations, for example, on emissions or hours of operation. PSD and Title V programs both use PTE for defining and identifying major sources. Although we have attempted to identify reasonable adjustments to account for PTE in our methodolo gy , there are significant uncertainties in our PTE

- based estimates, particularly for the commercial, residential and small manufacturing sectors that have not traditionall y been subject to any form of air permitting. In practice, for example, for the res idential sector and for many of the facilities in the commercial sector, where CO2 emissions are primaril y due to space heating/appliance usage, the combustion units are not likely

to be used constantly

at their maximum rated capacity because heating is no t needed ye ar - round and heating s ys tems have thermostats. However, for our anal ys is we do assume full PTE

-based estimates for the residential and commercial sectors, using PTE adjustment factors of 10 and 6.6, respectivel y to adjust actual emissions to PT E level. Absent industry specific data, for small manufacturing source categories we assume a PTE adjustment factor of 2; individual manufacturing facilities may operate their combustion equipment at levels above and below this capacity utilization rate, but we believe this PTE adjustment reflects a reasonable average rate across the variety of small manufacturing facilities included in the threshold anal ys is. Ultimately , the number of sources brought into either the PSD or Title V

### 95

programs due solel y to their PTE would depend on how EPA interprets PTE for various types of emitting equipment (e.g., space

- heating furnaces in residential and commercial buildings), and the extent to which streamlined mechanisms are made available for sources to obtain legal l imits on their PTE so that the programs are not applicable. No such decisions or interpretations have been made at this point and, as mentioned in the preamble, they will require significant time to develop. As a result, our threshold anal ys is uniformly assumes that no PTE limits are in place for any of the affected sectors, which may likel y be the case in the immediate stages of GHG permitting for affected sources. There is significant uncertainty in both our modification rate for newl y major GHG source s and in our estimate of modification activity at existing major sources that will become subject to PSD review for GHG emission increases. The general uncertainty results from predicting not onl y how many major sources will undergo phys ical or operational changes in any given ye ar, but also which of those changes would result in GHG emissions increases that would exceed a proposed GHG significance level. First, information is not available across sectors and source categories on the types and numbers of specific physical and operational changes that would result in GHG emissions increases in amounts that can be estimated and that therefore can be compared to various GHG emissions significance levels. Second, there is uncertainty in how many project modif

ications will occur within any given ye ar because decisions on these projects are driven b y facility

- and sector

- based growth patterns and business planning decisions. L astl y, some source categories and units that emit GHGs have not previousl y been subjec t to any typ e of permitting or reporting requirements; as a result, for these sources, there is very little historical record for use in estimating the number and types of projects that would occur at these sources and, in turn, establish an appropriate si gnificance level for GHGs. b. Uncertainties in Permitting Costs The permit burden cost estimates that are multiplied by the source counts to derive the benefits of the rule are also subject to uncertainty. As noted Attachment C to the RIA, the primary reference sources for our estimate of burden hours and costs for permitting GHGs are the most recent ICRs for the PSD and title V programs. There a number of uncertainties introduced in using these references for costing GHG permitting activities. First , we are assuming that the average, conventional pollutant per

-permit costs will be similar for GHGs. We do recognize the likelihood that residential and commercial permits would be simpler and have a

### 96

lower per

-permit burden than traditional industrial sources, and have made adjustments for this: however, for industrial sources we assume per

-permit costs on par with what are estimated in the latest I CRs for PSD and title V programs. There is uncertainty in appl ying these average IC R
based costs to GHG permitting, even for industrial sources, because there is no historical track record for permitting these GHG sources and thus any cost efficiencies that have been realized over the ye ars for conventional pollutant permitting, and thus reflected in the current ICRs, may not be initially

realized for GHG permitting. For example, we assume the same public hearing estimate as included in the I CR for current PSD permits (i.e., that 1 in 50 major PSD permits require a hearing)

—for GHG sources this number may be higher initially

if there ends up being significantl y more public interest in these permits. We do believe overall, however, that larger facilities, especially

those affected at higher threshold levels, will have had sufficient permitting experience such that out ICR

- based costs should reasonabl y reflect the added burden of including GHGs. As mentioned above, in our burden scenario analyses we do discount the ICR

- based per

permit costs for residential and commercial sources to reflect what we believe will generally be simpler permits, involving primarily uniform combustion ty

pe equipment. For PSD we discount the per

-permit cost by

30%, and for title V we discount the per

-permit cost by 50%. There is significant uncertainty in these estimated discounts sin ce we have no track record for permitting these smaller commercial and residential sources. However, we do believe that, based solel y on the ty pe and uniformity of the GHG emission units that would be subject to permitting at these facilities under lower GHG threshold scenarios, that average per

-permit costs would be less than those currentl y experienced by more complex industrial facilities, with numerous emission units, for currentl y regulated pollutants. c. Additional uncertainties and limitations of the benefits anal ys is Current avoided permitting cost or regulatory relief estimates also do not include the avoided costs to comply

with PSD BACT requirements due to lack of available data. This omission will tend to reduce the amount of regulatory reli ef that smaller sources of GHG reported in this RIA will experience during the phase

- in period. In addition to the avoided BACT costs we are unable to quantify , there are likely general economic costs associated with requiring permitting for these smaller sources of GHG. Numerous public comments on the proposed rule spoke to the economic burden permitting would place on sources above the actual

### 97

costs to obtain a permit. These costs might include delays or impediments to entering a new market or to expand existing facilities to accommodate economic growth. These avoided costs might be viewed as additional costs of doing business or barriers to entry for these smaller sources of GHG

. The avoided economic costs of these possible additional costs or barriers to doing business have not been considered in the regulatory relief estimates provided for this final rule due to lack of available information on the nature and value of such avoided impacts

. If such avoided cost estimates were available, these estimate s would tend to increase the regulatory relief burden reported for the final rule. For the multiple year regulatory relief estimates, we assume that the annual estimates can be extrapolated to multiple years without adjustment. This presumes that permitting activity would be constant over time. It is quite possible that permit activity for these smaller sources may grow over time with economic growth and will likely vary from year to year due to differences in business activity . However, we do not have sufficient information about these ye ar- to - ye ar variations nor expected growth in permitting to develop more precise estimates. Given the uncertainty

in the annual relief estimates and the short time frame anal yz ed (five ye ars), we feel it reasonable to not consider these potential yearl y fluctuations for the phase

- in period. Consideration of growth in permits over time would tend to increase the regulatory relief estimates reported for the final rule. In a similar manner, we do not discount the phase

- in regulatory relief to the present in this final report. Since the anal ytical time period evaluated varies from annual up to five years, we feel this is a reasonable approach. Discounting the regulatory relief estimates to present values would tend to lower the present value total amount of regulatory relief reported. Social Cost Limitations and Uncertainties The social costs of this rule are the foregone environmental benefits that might occur during the phase

- in period absent this rulemaking. This subject is discussed in Section 4 of the RIA. We are unable to estimate the PSD BACT requirements that would likely occur for the smaller sources of GHG at this time. Because BACT is a case

- by

- case decision and evolves over time, because we do not at this time have historical experience with the available controls for small

- source GHG emissions, and because of the inherent uncertainty in describing the typ es of sources that would have triggered BACT absent this rule, we cannot quantify the emission

### 98

reduc tions that might be feasible or the associated pollution control costs. For this reason, the social costs of this rule are discussed qualitativel y in this RIA. Economic Impact Limitations and Uncertainties As previously

discussed there is uncertainty in the estimates of sources affected by this final rule and the permitting burden costs used to estimate the benefits (regulatory relief) of this rule. These uncertainties also affect the economic impact anal ys is conducted. In the economic impact anal ys is, we compare the avoided permit burden cost estimates to average industry revenues in order to gauge the magnitude of regulatory relief for affected sources. We used average industry

revenue, and average firm revenue estimates by firm size to estimate avoided

cost - to - sales ratios due to lack of data specific to the sources actuall y obtaining regulatory relief. The actual benefits to individual firms affected b y this rule may differ from industry

averages.

### 99 Section 9 References U.S. Census Bureau
. Statisti cs of U.S. Businesses: 2002. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics

. Consumer Price Index 2002

- 2007. http://www.bls.gov/cpi/

. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency . April 20 10 . Summary of Methodology and Data Use to Estimate Burden Relief and Evaluate Resource Requirements at Alternative Greenhouse Gas Permitting Thresholds. (Appendix C) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

. April 20 10 . Technical Support Document for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Threshold Evaluation. (Appendix B) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency . November 2006. Final Guidance for EPA Rulewriters: Regulatory

Flexibility

Act as Amended b y the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. http://www.epa.gov/sbrefa/documents/rfaguidance11

- 00
- 06.pdf

. U.S. Small Business Administration

. Table of Small Business Size Standards. Accessed 8/11/08. http://www.sba.gov/idc/groups/public/documents/sba_homepage/serv_sstd_tablepdf.pdf

.

### 100 Attachment A Source Categories Affected by the Rule with Industry Detail

Table A- 1. Title V Sources Expected to Experienc e Regulatory Relief at Alternative Threshold Levels by Industry Category 1

Title V Sources Experiencing Regulatory Relief at Alternative Thresholds Source Category 25,000 tpy 50,000 tpy Final Rule Step 2 100,000 tpy Final Rule Step 1 Anyway Electricity Generating Unit s 161 285 285 285 Adipic Acid Production 0 0 0 0 Aluminum Production 0 0 0 0 Ammonia Manufacturing 0 0 0 0 Cement Production 0 0 0 0 Electronics Manufacturing 134 145 177 190 Ferroalloy Production 0 0 0 0 Glass Production 247 247 247 247 HCFC
- 22 Production 0 0 0 3 Hydrogen Production 33 37 43 61 Iron and Steel Production 0 0 0 0 Lead Production 4 4 4 4 Lime Manufacturing 3 23 29 37 Magnesium Production 0 0 0 0 Nitric Acid Production 1 2 3 18 Petrochemical Production 0 0 0 0 Petroleum Refineries 3 3 3 3 Phosphoric Acid Production 0 0 0 0 Pulp and Paper Manufacturing 0 3 15 160 Silicon Carbide Production 0 0 0 0 Soda Ash Manufacturing 0 0 0 0 Titanium Dioxide Production 0 0 0 0 Zinc Production 3 3 3 3 Ethanol Production 54 54 97 119 Foo d Processing 3,438 3,438 3,438 3,438 Unspecified Industrial Stationary Com bustion (Other Manufacturing and Industrial Facilities) 163,054 165,083 166,661 166,693
Underground Coal Mines 135 160 183 235 Oil and Natural Gas Systems 2,266 2,353 2,353 2,353 Landfills 1,430 2,447 3,164 3,357 MWCs 1 1 1 1 (continued)

### 101

Table A- 1. Title V Sources Expected to Experience Regulatory Relief at Alternative Threshold Levels by Industry Category (continued)

Title V Sources Experiencing Regulatory Relief at Alternative Thresholds Source Category 25,000 tpy 50,000 tpy Final Rule Step 2 100,000 tpy Final Rule

Step 1 Anyway Stationary Combustion Equipment (Generators) 37,351 37,351 37,351 37,351 All Commercial
— Stationary Fuel Com bustion 1,354,760 1,355,321 1,355,8 70 1,355,921 Multi

- Family Fuel Combustion 610,340 610,480 610,500 610,500 Single

- Family Fuel Combustion 3,925,000 3,925,000 3,925,000 3,925,000 Total 6,098,352 6,102,374 6,105,361 6,105,913 1 Thresholds are shown as tpy CO 2 e. Attachment B U
. S
. Environmental Protection Agency. April 2010. “ Technical Support Document for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Threshold Evaluation

. ” See docket at EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2009
- 0517. 2 Modifying PSD sources are also expected to experience regulatory relief, but these estimates are not reflected in this table.

### 102

Table A- 2 . New PSD Sources Expected to Experience Regulatory Relief at Alternative Threshold Levels by Industry Category New PSD Sources Sources Experiencing Regulatory Relief at Alternative Thresholds 1,2 Source Category 25,000 tpy 50,000 tpy Final Rule Step 2 100,000 tpy Final Rule Step 1 Anyway Electricity Generating Units 20 29 33 93 Adipic Acid Production 0 0 0 0 Aluminum Production 0 0 0 0 Ammonia Manufacturing 0 0 0 0 Cement Production 0 0 0 0 Electronics Manufacturing 0 0 0 0 Ferroalloy Production 0 0 0 0 Glass Production 1 1 1 1 HCFC
- 22 Production 0 0 0 0 Hydrogen Production 0 0 0 0 Iron and Steel Production 0 0 0 0 Lead Production 0 0 0 0 Lime Manufacturing 0 0 0 0 Magnesium Production 0 0 0 0 Nitric Acid Production 0 0 0 0 Petrochemical Production 0 0 0 0 Petroleum Refineries 0 0 0 0 Phosp horic Acid Production 0 0 0 0 Pulp and Paper Manufacturing 0 0 0 0 Silicon Carbide Production 0 0 0 0 Soda Ash Manufacturing 0 0 0 0 (continued)

### 103

Table A- 2 . New PSD Sources Expected to Experience Regulatory Relief at Alternative Threshold Levels by In dustry Category (continued) New PSD Sources Sources Experiencing Regulatory Relief at Alternative Thresholds 1,2 Source Category 25,000 tpy 50,000 tpy Final Rule Step 2 100,000 tpy Final Rule Step 1 Anyway Titanium Dioxide Production 0 0 0 0 Zinc Produc tion 0 0 0 0 Ethanol Production 4 4 7 10 Food Processing 41 47 47 47 Unspecified Industrial Stationary Com bustion (Other Manufacturing and Industrial Facilities) 529 534 544 546

Underground Coal Mines 0 0 0 0 Oil and Natural Gas Sy stems 23 38 44 48 L andfills 0 0 0 0 MWCs 0 1 1 2 Stationary Com bustion Equipment (Generators) 299 299 299 299

All Commercial

- Stationary Fuel Com bustion 12,034 12,038 12,039 12,041
Multi

- Family Fuel Com bustion 6,397 6,400 6,400 6,400 Single

- Family Fuel Com bustion 515 5 15 515 515 All 19,863 19,906 19,930 20,002 1 Regulatory alternatives reflect tons per year CO 2 e potential to emit. Attachment B U
. S
. Environmental Protection Agency. April 2010. “T echnical Support Document for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Threshold Evaluatio n . ” See docket at EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2009
- 0517. 2 Modifying PSD sources are also expected to experience regulatory relief, but these estimates are not reflected in this table.

# Attachment B

Te chnical Support Document for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Thresholds

Evaluation

Air Quality

Policy Division Office of Air Quality

Policy and Standards U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

M arch 29, 2010

### i Table of Contents Page 1. Purpose
................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 4
2. Overview

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 4
3. Emissions

- based Threshold Analysis

................................ ................................ ........................ 5 3.1 General Description of Overall Approach

................................ ................................ ......... 5
3.1.1 Threshold Levels

................................ ................................ ................................ ... 5 3.1.2 Greenhouse Gases

................................ ................................ ................................ . 6 3.1.3 Source Sectors
................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 7 3.1.4 Potential to Emi t Methodology

................................ ................................ ............. 8 3.1.5 New and Modified Sources

................................ ................................ ................... 9 3.2 Threshold Summary

Results

................................ ................................ .............................. 9
3.3 Electricity Generating Sector

................................ ................................ ........................... 12
3.4 Industrial Sector

................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 14
3.4.1 Data Sources
................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 17 3.4.2 Potential to Emit

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 17 3.4.3 Methodology

for New Units

................................ ................................ ............... 18 3.5 Methodology for Existing Unspecified Industrial Stationary Combustion Source Category Emissions

................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 18 3.6 Methodology

for Existing Specific Industrial Sectors Considering Combustion, Process , and Fugitiv e Emissions

................................ ................................ .................... 20

### ii

3.6.1 Adipic Acid Production

................................ ................................ ....................... 21 3.6.2 Aluminum Production

................................ ................................ ......................... 23 3.6.3 Ammonia Production

................................ ................................ .......................... 25 3.6.4 Cement Production

................................ ................................ .............................. 26 3.6.5 Electronic Production

................................ ................................ .......................... 27 3.6.6 Ethanol Production

................................ ................................ .............................. 29 3.6.7 Ferroallo y Production

................................ ................................ .......................... 31 3.6.8 Food Processing

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 33 3.6.9 Glass Manufacturing

................................ ................................ ........................... 34 3.6.10 HCFC
- 22 Production

................................ ................................ ......................... 35 3.6.1 1 Hydrogen Production

................................ ................................ ........................ 37 Table of Contents (cont.) Page 3.6.12 Iron and Steel Production

................................ ................................ .................. 38 3.6.13 Lead Production

................................ ................................ ................................ 41 3.6.14 Lime

................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 42 3.6.15 Magnesium Production and Processing

................................ ............................ 43 3.6.16 Nitric Acid Production

................................ ................................ ...................... 45 3.6.17 Petrochemical Production

................................ ................................ ................. 46 3.6.18 Petroleum Refineries

................................ ................................ ......................... 48 3.6.19 Phosphoric Acid Production

................................ ................................ .............. 50 3.6.20 Pulp and Paper Manufacturing

................................ ................................ .......... 51 3.6.21 Silicon Carbide Manufacturing

................................ ................................ ......... 52 3.6.22 Soda Ash Production

................................ ................................ ......................... 54 3.6.23 Titanium Dioxide Production

................................ ................................ ............ 55 3.6.24 Zinc Production

................................ ................................ ................................ . 56 3.7 Energy

Sector
................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 57 3.7.1 Oil and Gas Systems
................................ ................................ ........................... 57

### iii

3.7.2 Underground Coal Mining

................................ ................................ .................. 58
3.8 Waste Sector
................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 61
3.8.1 L andfills

................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 61 3.8.2 Municipal Solid Waste Combustors

................................ ................................ .... 63 3.9 Agriculture (Stationary Fuel Combustion)

................................ ................................ ...... 64 3.10 Commercial Stationary Fuel Combustion

................................ ................................ ...... 66 3.11 Residential Buildings

................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 69 3.11.1 Single

- Family

H omes ................................ ................................ ........................ 70 3.11.2 Multi

- Family

Residential Buildings

................................ ................................ .. 71
References

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 76 Appendix A

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 81 Appendix B

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 82

### 4

Technical Support Document for Permit Thresholds for Greenhouse Gases

1. Purpose The purpose of this document is to provide the background information that was used to support EPA's decision process on evaluating and selecting greenhouse gas (GHG) major source applicability

thresholds for Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Title V permitting for EPA’s fin al rule “Prevention of Signi ficant Deterioration and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule”. The document describes the analysis used to estimate the number of existing and new facilities (e.g., industrial plant or commercial building) that would exceed different GHG emission threshold levels. The document also summarizes the results of this analysis for each sector. The results of this analysis served as one of the fundamental bases for evaluating administrative burdens at both existing permitting thres holds and for evaluating and selecting proposed alternative permitting thresholds to address administrative necessity concerns. 2. Overview In order to support EPA's assessment of the administrative burden created by adding GHGs to existing Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Title V permitting programs, it was necessary to develop information on the number of affected facilities at both the current permitting major source thresholds (generally , 100 tons per ye ar for Title V and 100 or 250 tons per year for PSD depending on the source category classification) and at alternative higher thresholds. An affected facility would be one who's annual emissions of the GHG equal or exceed the major source threshold being evaluated. Eight threshold levels ranging from 100 to 100,000 tons per year of GHG emissions were evaluated. Some of the alternative thresholds evaluated are the same as ones (e.g., 25,000 tons per year CO 2 

### - equivalents) considered in previous studies and in support of EPA's propos ed and final GHG m andatory reporting r ule s (GHG MRR, 74 FR 68, pp. 16447

– 16731 and 74 FR 209, pp. 56260
- 56519, respectively) . One key difference between the emissions data developed for this analysis and the emissions data developed to support the propo sed GHG MRR is that this anal ys is is based on a facility's "potential to emit " (PTE) while the proposed GHG reporting rule was based on " actual " emissions (i.e., the emissions a facility actually emits in a given ye ar). PTE is defined as the maximum capac ity of a stationary

source to emit a pollutant under its physical and operational design, including certain legal limitations, for example, on emissions or hours of operation. NSR and Title V programs both use PTE for defining major sources. The end result is generally

that more facilities will exceed a given threshold on a PTE basis than on an actual basis. This is an important differentiation in terms of both evaluating the thresholds under this rule and when comparing the results to other threshold anal ys is, such as the supporting data for the EPA's GHG MRR
.

### 5

Although the primary

focus of this analysis was on the potential administrative burden associated with different GHG permitting emission levels as represented in terms of number of facilities pot entially

subject to permitting, information on GHG emissions from affected facilities was also collected to assess the relative coverage of national stationary source GHG emissions at the different threshold levels. While the environmental impact associated with the different GHG permitting levels was not used as the basis for the GHG applicability thresholds identified in the final GHG tailoring rule, the information on national emissions coverage provides a useful measure to consider the potential scope of the proposed alternative thresholds, their coverage of key GHG emission source categories, and whether they promote the environmental purposes of the PSD and Title V programs. 3. Emissions - based Threshold Analysis
3.1 General Description of Overall Approach This section presents a general description of the overall approach EPA used to evaluate a range of permitting thresholds in terms of the number of sources affected, and amount of emissions covered. EPA made use of earlier anal ys es performed to develop emission thresholds for the proposed and final GHG MRR, or used the same data sources when additional anal ys es were required. EPA did not conduct primary research for this analysis, but instead relied on published research and publicl y available g overnment data, such as EPA ' s e GRID database of electric generating source emission s , Economic and Housing Census data, and Energy Information Agency (E IA) data o n energy

consumption.
3.1.1 Threshold Levels EPA evaluated eight different GHG emission thresholds: GHG Thresholds (tons per year ) 100 250 1,000 5,000 10,000 25,000 50,000 100,000 The first two thresholds are the current Clean Air Act major source criteria pollutant thresholds for the federal operating permit program under Title V (general ly , 100 tpy for major

### 6

source applicability) , and the PSD construction permit program under Title I

. Under PSD, a "major stationary

source" is any

source belonging to a specified list of 28 source categories which emits or has a PTE of 100 tpy or more , or any

other source type which emits or has the potential to emit such pollutants in amounts equal to or greater than 250 tpy. The six additional thresholds cover the range of thresholds evaluated for the proposed GHG MRR, and add two additional thresholds at 5,000 and 50,000 tons per year. Like the Clean Air Act , the permit thresholds are based on U.S. short tons (tons) instead of metric tons (mtons). There is a three

- orders

- of

- magnitude range in the thresholds which reflects the much higher quantity

of GHG emissions compared to criteria pollutant emissions from the primary source of GHG emissions, fossil fuel combustion. For example , an uncontrolled natural gas

fired boiler that emits 100 tons of NO x 

### annually would at the same time emit about 100,000 ton s of CO 2 

### . The threshold anal ys is of source counts and emissions was done on a " potential to emit " basis, because that is the basis that is relevant for the permitting requirements under PSD and title V. Potential emissions (in short tons) from each source were evaluated against the threshold levels in order to determine whether or not a source would be included in the threshold count. When a source was identified as being covered b y a given threshold level, the actual emissions from that source were inc luded to determine the emissions covered b y the threshold. In other words, where summary

tables present " Tg GHG Emissions Covered p er Year " these are the actual emissions that would be covered b y the threshold level, given the source count arrived at cons idering potential to emit emission levels.
3.1.2 Greenhouse Gases EPA evaluated emissions of the major GHGs that are directl y emitted by human activities at the eight threshold levels. The GHGs evaluated are shown below in Table 1
. For purposes of thi s analysis emissions were evaluated on both an individual GHG mass basis and CO 2 

### - equivalent basis (CO 2 

### e). CO 2 

### e normalizes the different heat trapping capacities of the different GHGs to that of CO 2 

### . A quantity of a GHG is converted to a CO 2 

### e basis b y multiplying the mass of the compound emitted by its Global Warming Potential (GWP)

. The GWP is a metric that incorporates both the heat

- trapping ability and atmospheric lifetime of each GHG relative to CO 2 

### .

### 7 Table 1 Major GHGs Direc tly Emitted by Human Ac tivities

Greenhouse Gas Chemical Formula or Acronym Global Warming

Potential (GWP) * Carbon dioxide CO 2 1 Methane CH 4 21 Nitrous oxide N 2 O 310 Perfluorocarbons PFCs Varies by compound Hydrofluorocarbons HFCs Varies by compound Sulfur hexafluoride SF 6 23,900
* 

### GWP values as codified in the EPA’s final GHG mandatory reporting rule : Table A

- 1 to Subpart A of Part 98

– Global Warming Potentials, FR, Vol.74, No. 209, p. 56395.

Sector descriptions contained in this document include a discussion of GHGs evaluated for each sector. If the analysis included more than one GHG , the description includes gas

specific counts as well as a CO 2 

### e count. The threshold analyses for stationary fossil fuel combustion were simplified by excluding CH 4 

### and N 2 

### O emiss ions, because CO 2 

### comprises over 99 percent of GHG emissions from fossil fuel combustion.
3.1.3 Source Sectors In this analysis EPA evaluated the same range of stationary source typ es with direct GHG emissions as identified in the proposed and final GH G MRR . The proposed GHG MRR source categories were based on a comprehensive review of all U.S. source categories with GHG emissions, to include the categories that emit the most significant amount of GHG emissions. The stationary

sources evaluated in thi s anal ys is can be grouped in the sectors shown below :
● Electricity

Generation (facilities with fossil fuel

- fired electric generating units) ; ● Industry

(range of industries with process and combustion GHG emissions) ; ● Energy

(oil and gas extraction, transport, and processing; underground coal mining) ; ● Was te Treatment (landfills and municipal solid waste incinerators) ; ● Agriculture (stationary fuel combustion); ● Commercial (stationary fuel combustion) ; and ● Residential (stationary fuel combustion)

.

### 8

A number of direct emission source types included in the GHG MRR anal ys is were not included in the potential to emit analysis because the GHG emissions from these sources were primarily fugitive emissions. Fugitive emissions are emissions which are not released, or could not be reasonably

released, through a stack or vent. Under the PSD rules, fugitive emissions are only included in potential to emit estimates if the source is one of 28 listed PSD source categories. Excluded fugitive emissions sources are listed below:

● Electrical equipment SF 6 

### emissions ;
● Wastewater treatment plants not associated with one of 28 listed PSD source categories (combustion is captured in the commercial sector anal ys is) ; and

● Agricultural manure management

. 3.1.4 Potential to Emit Methodology As noted earlier, the potential to emit (PTE) is the amount of emissions that can be emitted from a source operating at full capacity. The annual PTE is based on operation at full equipment capacity , 24 hours per day , 365 days per year (8 , 760 hours per year). For example, if a boiler has a maximum rated heat input capacity of ten million Btu per hour, the annual PTE for that boiler is the amount of emissions from burning 87,600 million Btu of fuel: 10 mmBtu/hr x 8 ,760 hrs/yr = 87,600 mmBtu/yr Capacity information and annual GHG emissions were available for some of the source categories from analyses performed to support the GHG MRR. In some cases the supporting anal ys es had already calculated GHG emissions on a full capacity basis, in which ca se EPA directly used those estimates as PTE estimates. Alternatively , some data from the supporting anal ys is estimated actual annual emissions using a baseline year. If capacity and baseline ye ar production information was provided in the supporting data , EPA adjusted the source actual emissions estimate by

the ratio of annual capacity to baseline production to estimate PTE. If capacity information was not available , EPA used capacity factors from other data sources to adjust actual emission estimates to PTE estimates. These capacity factors add varying uncertainty to the PTE estimate. Detailed descriptions of the different PTE calculation methodologies are included in the source descriptions in the following section. Removal by

pollution control equipment was considered in the PTE estimates, though control equipment removal was relevant in only a few cases (thermal oxidation of HPCs and CH 4 

### ). Also , as noted earlier, fugitive emissions, were onl y included in the PTE estimates if the source was one of the 28 listed PSD source categories. For example , fugitive CH 4 

### emissions from oil and gas transmission stations were not included in CH 4 

### or CO 2 

### e emissions when comparing to the different thresholds, but were included for iron and steel plants.

### 9

3.1.5 New Construction The source population data from the analyses supporting the GHG MRR , and other data sources provide information on existing sources and their emissions. The PSD and title V program requirements and applicability determinations , however, als o apply to new ly constructed sources. The general approach for estimating the annual number of new ly constructed sources was to apply growth rates in the number of units or facilities in a source category to the number of existing facilities at the different thresholds. Growth rates were available from a variety of sources including Economic Census data, EIA energy survey data, and various EPA regulatory impact anal ys es and information collection requests which require source population estimates. In som e cases there was sufficient information to distribute new sources to different thresholds based on emission information specific to the new sources (electric generating, municipal solid waste combustors, and commercial stationary fuel combustion). Otherwise EPA assumed the same size and threshold distribution for new units as for existing units. For example , if the annual growth rate in a category was one percent , the number of existing facilities above a threshold were multiplied by the fractional growth rate to estimate the number of new faciliti es at that threshold per ye ar. EPA did not develop estimates for modifications to exsiting sources (which can be potentially

subject to PSD requirements) as part of this threshold study ; estimates for modifications were prepared under a separate burden anal ys is prepared for the final GHG tailoring rule and located in the final docket for the rulemaking 13



### . 3.2 Threshold Summary Results The resulting counts of affected stationary source facilities and the amount of actual GHG emissions covered at different PTE thresholds for all sectors are shown in the tables below

. GHG emissions covered at each threshold are in Tg, which is equivalent to million metric tons

. SIunits were used for the covered emissions to be consistent with the EPA’s official U.S. GHG Inventory so that comparions could be made to the inventory in terms of emissions coverage at different applicability

thresholds. The complete data for the sectors and subsectors are provided in supporting spre adsheets that accompany this report. These spreadsheets are identified in Appendices A and B.

13 See “Summary of Methodology and Data Used to Estimate Burden Relief and Evaluate Resource Requirements at Alternative Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Permitting Thresholds” contained in the public docket for the final tailoring rule at EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2009
- 0517.

### 10 Table 2 CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary -- All Stationary Source Sectors

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 6, 118,252 67,4 69 3 , 86 7 250 1, 079,483 19, 755 3 , 78 6 1,000 302,863 4, 430 3 ,723 5,000 59,140 549 3 ,622 10,000 30,341 313 3 ,564 25,000 16,564 140 3 ,493 50,000 9,980 96 3 ,387 100,000 5,326 72 3 ,267


### Table 3 CO 2 

### Threshold Summary -- All Stationary Source Sectors

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 6, 113,861 67, 469 3 ,651 250 1, 075,078 19, 755 3 ,570 1,000 2 98,527 4, 430 3 ,513 5,000 55,313 549 3 ,413 10,000 26,836 313 3 ,357 25,000 13,637 139 3 ,293 50,000 8,109 96 3,212 100,000 4,226 72 3 ,114

### 11 Table 4 CH 4 

### Threshold Summary -- All Stationary Source Sectors

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities Added p er Year CH 4 Emissions Covered (Tg p er y ear) 100 4,201 0 7.807 250 3,851 0 7.759 1,000 2,887 0 7.321 5,000 1,042 0 4.740 10,000 466 0 3.697 25,000 138 0 2.234 50,000 34 0 1.185 100,000 3 0 0.211


### Table 5 N 2 

### O Threshold Summary -- All Stationary Source Sectors

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities Added p er Year N 2 O Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 47 0 0.074 250 46 0 0.074 1,000 31 0 0.068 5,000 5 0 0.0 22 10,000 0 0 0 25,000 0 0 0 50,000 0 0 0 100,000 0 0 0

### 12 Table 6 High GWP Gases Threshold Summary - - All Stationary Source Sectors

GHG GHG

Threshold* (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities Added p er Year GHG Emissions

C overed (Tg per y ear) HFC 100 3 0 0.001 HFC 250 3 0 0.001 HFC 1,000 1 0 0.001 HFC 5,000 and above 0 0 0 PFC 100 and above 0 0 0 SF 6 100 and above 0 0 0
* Where a threshold is not listed for a particular GHG, threshold counts for that threshold and any higher thresholds can be assumed to be zero. 

### 3.3 Electricity Generating Sector Data Sources The latest version of EPA ' s e GRID database (2006) was used to estimate the PTE of electricity generating facilities and counts of units above the different emission thresholds. The e GRID database includes year 2004 characteristics, operating information, and annual emissions (including CO 2 

### ) for U.S. facilities that have a generation capacity greater than one MW, and sell electric power to the grid. A facility' s PTE was estimated based on the e GRID generator table. The generator table, which is based on the 2004 EIA form 860 database, provides prime mover, generator nameplate capacity , and primary

energy source (fuel ty

pe) for each generator down to 0. 1 MW. To calculate PTE, we combined the nameplate capacity and primary

fuel for each of the fossil

- fired units with average fuel based prime mover heat rates (Btu/kWh) published by EIA ( EIA, 2007).

### 13 Table 7 EGU Prime Mover Heat Rates (EIA Electric Power Annual, Table A7, 2007) Prime Mover Fuel Average Heat Rate (Btu/kWh)
Steam turbine Coal 10,114 Gas 10,466 Oil 10,400 Simple combustion turbine Gas 11,459 Oil 13,216 Com bined cycle combustion turbine Gas 7,445 Oil 11,015 Internal combustion engine Gas 9,923 Oil 10,149


### The e GRID database includes cogeneration plants and generating units at industrial plants that primarily

supply electric power and steam to a host facility . We eliminated these units from the electric generation facility population based on North American Industry Classification System (NAI CS ) code, so that the only facilities included were facilities with a NAI CS code beginning with 22 (Utilities). The generator

- nameplate

- heat

- rate approach potentially underestimates PT E for cogeneration plants, where a portion of the burner heat input provides useful thermal energy in addition to electric output. This potential to underestimate PTE affects 321 of 2,237 or 14 percent of facilities evaluated. Methodology for Existing Fa cilities Fuel combustion was the only source of GHG emissions considered for the electric ity generation sector. From the e GRID and EIA information EPA calculated a maximum annual fuel heat input based on 8,760 hours of operation for the combustors assoc iated with the generator. This calculated maximum annual heat input was used with fuel combustion emission factors from the GHG MRR for the primary fuel, to calculate the facility PTE. The calculations covered 10,487 fossil fuel

- fired generators with nam eplate capacities down to 0.1 MW or 100,000 kW. EPA also did not evaluate fugitive CH 4 

### emissions from facility coal piles. Fossil fuel

fired steam electric plants with heat input greater than 250 mmBtu/hr heat input are one of the 28 listed PSD source c ategories that include fugitive emissions when calculating PTE. However, the CO 2 

### PTE from combustion alone for this size facility is about 225,000 tons per year. This is

### 14

well over all of the emission thresholds considered in this analysis without consideration of the contribution of fugitive CH 4 

### . New Units The e GRID generator table includes an online year field. To determine the number of new units per ye ar at different thresholds EPA counted generators online each year and totaled the emissions assoc iated with those generators at the facility level over the 15

- ye ar period from 1990 through 2004. Counts were made of the number of these facilities over the different PTE thresholds, and averaged over the 15 ye ars to arrive at the number of new or modifi ed facilities per year. Threshold Summary The table below shows the facilities and emissions covered at the different emission thresholds based on the described methodology . There were a total of 2,237 facilities in the electric generation population , so all facilities and all emissions are covered up to the 5,000 ton PTE thresho ld. Almost all emissions (99.9 percent), and about 75 percent of facilities are covered at the highest 100,000 ton PTE threshold.
Table 8 CO 2 

### Threshold Summary Results -- E lectricity Generating Sector

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 2,237 93 2,373 250 2,237 93 2,373 1,000 2,237 93 2,373 5,000 2,237 91 2,373 10,000 2,195 86 2,373 25,000 2,076 73 2,373 50,000 1,911 64 2,373 100,000 1,721 60 2,371


### 3.4 Industrial Sector The industrial sector comprises establishments engaged in the mechanical, physical, or chemical transformation of materials, substances, or components into new products, and specificall y includes businesses classified in Sectors 31

– 33 according to the North American

### 15

Industry Classification System (NAICS) . Industrial source greenhouse gases result from manufacturing processes as well as combustion processes. Because there is a great deal of variability

within the sector, this technical support document includes industry

- specific discussions a fter a general sector overview. For the industrial sector, EPA considered the six individual greenhouse gases separatel y, and also prepared an analysis considering CO 2 

### e. In preparation of the GHG MRR, EPA identified 23 industrial sectors where the GHG emissions were significant ; these sectors are listed in Table 9.

### 16 Table 9 Industrial Sectors and GHG Emis sions NAICS Code Industrial Sector CO 2 CH 4 N 2 O SF 6 HFC PFC 325199 Adipic Acid Production X X 331312 Aluminum Production X X 325311 Ammonia Production X 327310 Cement Production X 334 Electronics Manufacturing X X X X 325193 Ethanol Production X 331112 Ferroalloy Production X X 3116 Food Processing X 327 Glass Production X 325120 HCFC
- 22 Production X X

Hydrogen Production X 331111 Iron and Steel Production X X 3314 Lead Production X 327 410 Lime Manufacturing X 3314 Magnesium Production X X 325311 Nitric Acid Production X X 3251 Petrochemical Production X X 324110 Petroleum Refineries X X 325312 Phosphoric Acid Production X 3221 Pulp and Paper Manufacturing X 327910 Silicon Carbide Production X X 325181 Soda Ash Manufacturing X 325188 Titanium Dioxide Production X 3314 Zinc Production X 

### In addition, there are a large number o f industrial establishments across all industrial sec tors that emit less significant amounts of GHGs (primarily CO 2 

### ) from stationary

source fuel combustion. Combustion emissions from these establishments were analyzed under the Unspecified Industrial Stationary Combustion source category

.

### 17

3.4.1 Data Sources There were several primary data sources used in preparation of the permit threshold anal ys is. EPA consulted anal ys es prepared in support of the GHG MRR for the 23 industrial sectors for which combustion, process and fugitive emissions were significa nt. These documents can be found in the docket numbered EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508. The TSDs contain industry

specific anal ys es of process, fugitive, and combustion emissions for industries. Supporting anal ys es used to prepare the TSDs are found in entries 00 46.7 and 0046.8 of the GHG MRR docket. These emissions estimate details were helpful in breaking down TSD emissio n estimates to compare facility

- specific emissions against the additional threshold levels considered in the permit threshold anal ys is, including 100, 250, 5 , 000, and 50,000 tons per year. Combustion emissions analyses for the Unspecified Industrial Stationary Combustion sectors used data from the 2002 Manufacturing Energy Combustion Survey

(MECS ) and the U.S. Census Bureau's 2002 Economic Cens us. MECS is a survey of manufacturing and industrial energy

uses and costs prepared b y the EIA (EIA, 2007)

. Data is collected b y manufacturing establishment through mailed questionnaires. The 2002 MECS data reflects responses accounting for approximatel y 9 8 percent of the manufacturing payroll , and reports separate energy

use estimates for 48 NAI CS industrial sector groups. The MECS provided information on the amount of fuel burned in 2002 by sector on an employ

ment basis. The 2002 Economic Census data provided information on the number of establishments sorted by three

digit NAICS code and disaggregated into specific size categories based on employ ment (U.S. Census, 2004).
3.4.2 Potential to Emit As mentioned earlier in this document, permit thresho ld anal ys es considered both actual emissions and PTE. When capacity information was not available, the analyses applied utilization rates from the Industrial Production and Capacity Utilization, Federal Reserve Statistical Release G

- 17 in order to adjust actual emissions to determine PTE emissions. These utilization rates are prepared quarterl y with annual revisions , and are published on the web (http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/g17 ). The main data source for the industrial production and capacity utilization rates is the U.S. Census Bureau ' s Census of Manufactures. Data introduced from other Cens us Bureau publications include the Census of Services and the Services Annual Survey

(for publ ishing) and selected Current Industrial Reports. Additional government source data include new annual data on minerals from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and updated deflators from the Bureau of Economic Anal ys is (BEA). In addition, the annual revisi ons include monthly production estimates that reflect updated seasonal factors and the inclusion of monthly

source data that became available (or were revised) after the closing of the regular four

- month reporting window.

### 18

3.4.3 Methodology for New Units To determine the number of new units per ye ar, EPA compared the number of establishments by

three

- digit NAICS code in 1998 to the number of establishments by three

- digit NAI CS code in 2002, and determined an avera ge annual growth rate for each three

- digi t NAI CS code. The growth rates were applied to each threshold count to determine the number of annual new establishments per industry per threshold. If the growth rate was determined to be negative, EPA assumed that no new establishments would be added; however, establishments were not reduced to reflect negative growth rates. EPA also supplemented these growth rates with agency estimates of expected new sources from various information collection requests (I CR) and regulatory

impact anal ys es (RIA) efforts. 3.5 Methodology for Existing Unspecified Industrial Stationary Combustion Source Category Emissions In order to determine establishment counts and emissions totals for the unspecified industrial stationary

combustion sources, EPA used 2002 Economic Census data showing manufacturing employ

ment by NAICS code and Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS) data published by EIA. Calculating greenhouse gas emissions required determining energy consumption per employee by industry and applying emissi on factors specific to the consumption profile derived from MECS data. The Economic Census data (2002) provide a count of establishments by employ ment category , where employment category is defined by

number of employees (e.g., 1

– 4, 5

– 9,...,500

– 999,... , more than 2,500). The MECS energy consumption data provide energy consumption by

industry . Both the employ ment data and the energy consumption data are organized according to the NAICS codes. As part of this anal ys is, EPA calculated industry

- specific GHG emission factors. The factors were calculated by considering actual fuel consumption in 2002, as determined by EIA. Actual fuel consumed was multiplied by fuel

- specific GHG emission factors to determine GHG emissions by

fuel type b y industry . To simplify the anal ys is, EPA only

included CO 2 

### emissions and ignored CH 4 

### and N 2 

### O in the CO 2 

### e calculations. CO 2 

### make s up between 99.3 and 99.7 percent of estimated CO 2 

### e emissions. Emissions for each fuel type were combined to determine total emissions for a s ector. Total emissions per sector were divided b y total energy consumption per sector to determine a factor to calculate GHG emissions per mmBtu of energy consumption spec ific to the industrial sector. The GHG emission factors were then multiplied by the energy

consumption per employee in order to determine emissions per employee. Multiplying the result by the average number employees per establishment, EPA determined total GHG emissions per establishment. The total emissions numbers were used to determ ine number of establishments and volume of emissions that would be caught b y each of the permit thresholds under consideration.

### 19

As discussed previousl y, a separate threshold analysis was conducted for 23 industrial sectors determined to have significant GHG emissions in the GHG MRR analy sis . In order to quantify the unspecified industrial stationary combustion source emissions, the combustion emissions and establishment counts from 19 of the se sectors were subtracted from the total industrial MECS analysis. For the remaining four industries, HCFC

- 22 production, hydrogen production, magnesium production, and nitric acid production, EPA could not readily isolate combustion emissions. For these industries, their establishment counts were subtracted from the unspecified industrial source threshold counts based on process emission threshold evaluations , assuming that any facility exceeding a threshold for process

- based emissions would exceed the threshold regardless of their combustion CO 2 

### emissions.

Pote ntial to Emit In order to determine potential to emit from the MECS and Economic Census numbers, EPA assumed a capacity utilization factor of 50%. There is a wide variety of generally

smaller manufacturing sources included under this general source categ ory . Based on comments we received on the proposed GHG tailoring rule, w e are using a 50% capacity utilization rate for this final anal ys is to better reflect what can be deemed reasonable operation under normal conditions for facilities in these source categories. Sources may operate their combustion equipment at levels above and below this capacity utilization rate, but we believe the 50% utilization rate reflects a reasonable average rate across the variety of facilities represented in this category

. New Units EPA applied industry

- specific growth rates to each sector and summed across sectors in order to determine number of new units. Threshold Summary

### 20 Table 10 CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary -- Unspecified Industrial Stationary Combustion

GHG Threshold (tons p e r y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 172 , 142 546 372.307 250 112 , 659 319 367.636 1,000 64 , 535 239 357.855 5,000 20 , 785 83 318.759 10,000 12 , 215 61 289.198 25,0 00 5 , 875 18 245.579 50,000 3,272 12 206.881 100,000 958 2 145.106


### 3.6 Methodology for Existing Specific Industrial Sectors C onsidering Combustion, Process , and Fugitive Emissions These analyses were based primaril y on the GHG MRR TSDs and the supporting anal ys es, including facility specific emission information . The e stimates considered each greenhouse gas separately. The GHG MRR TSDs included threshold counts and emissions calculations for 1 , 000, 10,000, 25,000 , and 100,000 metric tons per ye ar. Two steps were required for permit threshold consideration. First, emissions were recalculated in order to conduct the analysis in short tons for comparison to the permit thresholds. Second, the emissions were considered against the finer threshold stratification considered in the permit threshold anal ys is. For the permit threshold anal ys is, EPA determined that if the GHG MRR analysis showed all of the establishments exceeded a threshold, after adjustment for short tons, all of the establishments exceede d any lower thresholds. However, where fewer than 100 percent of the establishment s exceeded a threshold, additional analysis was required to compare emissions to the permit thresholds of 100, 250, 5,000, and 50,000 tons per year. EPA used the supporting summaries for the GHG MRR which included facility

- specific consumption, process, and fugitive emission reports in order to determine counts and emissions for each of the permit thresholds.

### 21

3.6.1 Adipic Acid Production There are four Adipic Acid Production plants in the U.S., all of which are estimated to exceed the highest 100,000 metric tons per ye ar emission threshold for CO 2 

### e on an actual emissions basis. Therefore all plants will also exceed all PTE thresholds on a CO 2 

### e basis. The CO 2 

### e emission estimate includes N2 

### O process emissions that total about 5.9 million metric tons CO 2 

### e, and 3.4 million metric tons of CO 2 

### from stationary fuel combustion sources. N 2 

### O Individual plant production and emission estimates were not made available because of confidential business information ( CBI) claims. However, f rom the Technical Support Document for the A dipic Acid Production Sector: Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0005), o verall U.S. adipic acid production was estimated to total approximately one million metric tons in 2006. The smallest U.S. plant only produced about two percent of the total. This plant, however, is the onl y plant that is uncontrolled. The three larger plants with the bulk of production have control equipment with N 2 

### O control effici encies that range from 90 to 99 percent

. The uncontrolled N 2 

### O emission factor is 300 kg N 2 

### O/mton adipic acid. Based on the two percent production share, this uncontrolled plant emitted about 6,000 metric tons of N 2 

### O (no GWP adjustment). This leaves about 13,100 metric tons of N2 

### O from the three larger controlled plants. Two plant s representing about 64 percent of production have control efficiencies in the range of 90 to 95 percent, and one plant with about 34 percent of pro duction has control close to 99 percent (EPA, 2001). Assuming similar production shares today , the share of national production (which is assumed for this anal ys is to be equivalent to capacity) appears to range from 30 to 35 percent for the three plants. Therefore , emissions and PTE for the controlled plants range from to 4 ,0 00 metric tons to 4 ,7 00 metric tons of N2 

### O per year. CO 2 

### The CO 2 

### emissions from fuel combustion can similarly be apportioned to the four plants. The small est plant , with only two percent of national production, is estimated at CO 2 

### emissions of 67,500 metric tons, and the next smallest, with 30 percent of national production, is estimated at 101,300 metric tons

. Potential to Emit The PTE for each facility was assumed to be equivalent to the emissions based on the apportionment described above. New Units EPA assumed that no new plants would be constructed for this sector.

### 22

Threshold Summary
Table 11

CO 2 

### Threshold Summary -- Adipic Acid Production
GHG T hreshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 4 0 3.376 250 4 0 3.376 1,000 4 0 3.376 5,000 4 0 3.376 10,000 4 0 3.376 25,000 4 0 3.376 50,000 4 0 3.376 100,00 0 3 0 3.3 09


### Table 12 N 2 

### O Threshold Summary -- Adipic Acid Production
GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities Added p er Year N 2 O Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 4 0 0.019 250 4 0 0.019 1,000 4 0 0.019 5,000 1 0 0.006 10,000 0 0 0 25,000 0 0 0 50,000 0 0 0 100,000 0 0 0

### 23 Table 13 CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary -- Adipic Acid Production

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emissions Covere d (Tg per y ear) 100 4 0 9.298 250 4 0 9.298 1,000 4 0 9.298 5,000 4 0 9.298 10,000 4 0 9.298 25,000 4 0 9.298 50,000 4 0 9.298 100,000 4 0 9.298



### 3.6.2 Aluminum Production The primary

aluminum production process results in emissions of CO 2 

### an d PFCs. The reduction of the alumina occurs through electrol ys is in a molten bath of natural or s ynthetic cryolite (Na 3 

### AlF 6 

### ). The reduction cells contain a carbon lining that serves as the cathode. Carbon is also contained in the anode, which can be a c arbon mass of paste, coke briquettes, or prebaked carbon blocks from petroleum coke. During reduction, most of the carbon in the anode is oxidized and released to the atmosphere as CO 2 

### . Potential to Emit CO 2 

### The Technical Support Document for Process Emissions from Primary Production of Aluminum: Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
2008
- 0508
- 0006) apportioned CO 2 

### emission estimates from the U.S. GHG inventory to the 13 operating smelters based on each smelters share o f total capacity. Operating smelter emissions were all above 100,000 tons of CO 2 

### , so no PTE estimate was required. Capacity information for the two idle smelters shows that these smelters are also capable of emitting over 100,000 tons of CO 2 

### per year. P FCs The reduction cells also emit two PFCs : perfluoromethane (CF 4 

### ) and perfluoroethane (C 2 

### F 6 

### ). The GWPs of the two PFCs are 6,500 and 9,200 respectivel y. During the smelting

### 24

process, when the alumina ore content of the electroly tic bath falls below critical levels required for electrolysis, rapid voltage increases occur, which are termed " anode effects. " Anode effects cause carbon from the anode and fluorine from the dissociated molten cryolite bath to combine, and produce fugitive emissions of CF 4 

### an d C 2 

### F 6 

### . Anode effects released approximately 2.5 million metric tons of CF 4 

### and C 2 

### F 6 

### in 2006 as documented in the GHG MRR TSD . CF 4 

### made up at least 85 percent of the combined emissions in 2006 (Inventory

of U.S. GHG Emissions and Sinks : 1990

– 2007). These emissions on a CO 2 

### e basis are equivalent to about 410 short tons of combined emissions as PFC. The proposed GHG MRR TSD estimated CO 2 

### e emissions from primary aluminum smelters at full capacity. The largest smelter has 11 percent of U.S. operating capacity . Therefore the largest smelter has a PTE of not more than 45 tons of PFC, and no facilities have a PTE greater than 100 tons. New Units No new primary

aluminum facilities are expected to be built. The growth rate in primary metals from the E conomi c Census data is only about 0.4 percent

. Threshold Summary Threshold summaries are displayed below for CO 2 

### and CO 2 

### e. All facilities have a PFC PTE less than 100 tons per year on a PFC basis.
Table 14 CO 2 

### Threshold Summary -- Primary Aluminum

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities Added p er Year GHG Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 15 0 3.800 250 15 0 3.800 1,000 15 0 3.800 5,000 15 0 3.800 10,000 15 0 3.800 25,000 15 0 3.800 50,000 15 0 3 .800 100,000 15 0 3.800

### 25 Table 1 5 CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary -- Primary Aluminum

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities Added p er Year GHG Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 15 0 3.951 250 15 0 3.951 1,000 15 0 3.951 5,000 15 0 3.951 10,000 15 0 3.951 25,000 15 0 3.951 50,000 15 0 3.951 100,000 15 0 3.951



### 3.6.3 Ammonia Production EPA reviewed the proposed Supporting Data f or Threshold Analysis Subpart E

– W, Greenhouse Gas Mandatory Reporting Rulemaking, March 10, 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0046.7) to determine actual emissions and calculate the potential to emit for 24 ammonia plants in operation. The anal ys is spreadsheet details CO 2 

### actual emission calculations for each plant based on ammonia production and urea production, and CO 2 

### , CH 4 

### , and N 2 

### O emission calculations for stationary fuel combustion based on 2006 data. For purposes of permit threshold anal ys is, the CH 4 

### and N 2 

### O emissions from combustion were not significant. Potential to Emit Cap acity information in the spreadsheet is based on the engineering design capacity adjusted for 340 days per year of effective production capability , using information provided by the United States Geological Survey (USGS ) . The PTE estimates were made by multiplying the actual emission estimates by the ratio of annual ammonia capacity to annual ammonia production adjusted to 365 days a year of operation instead of 340. EPA assumed that ratio also held for stationary

combustion units at the plant. New Units EPA assumed that no new plants would be constructed for this sector.

### 26

Threshold Summary
Table 16

CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary -- Ammonia Production

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emi ssions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 24 0 14.543 250 24 0 14.543 1,000 24 0 14.543 5,000 24 0 14.543 10,000 24 0 14.543 25,000 24 0 14.543 50,000 24 0 14.543 100,000 22 0 14. 540



### 3.6.4 Cement Production
Process
- related CO 2 

### emissions from cement pro duction are the second largest source of industrial CO 2 

### emissions in the United States. Cement production is done in two stages. The first stage is clinker production. In clinker production, raw materials (primarily limestone) are heated to induce calcination and produce lime. Lime reacts with silica

- containing materials and iron ore and aluminum to form clinker. During the process, CO 2 

### is generated as a by product and released to the atmosphere. Also during clinker production, some of the clinker raw materials form partiall y or full y calcinated cement kiln dust instead of forming clinker, resulting in additional process

- related CO 2 

### emissions. In the second stage of the production process, the clinker is ground and mixed with gy psum and other materials to make cement. Potential to Emit The Technical Support Document for Process Emissions from Cement: Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0008) shows 107 cement facilities in the U.S., 106 of which exceed all p ermit thresholds for CO 2 

### ( according to the TSD, the one facility

that does not exceed the 100,000 tons per year threshold accounted for over 90,000 metric tons of CO 2 

### e and approximately one - tenth of one percent of the cement industry emissions in 2006)

.

### 27

N ew Units Growth for the industrial sector was estimated at 0.4 percent , and as such, no additional facilities were included in this analysis. Threshold Summary
Table 17

CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary -- Cement Production

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 107 0 8 6.83 250 107 0 8 6.83 1,000 107 0 8 6.83 5,000 107 0 8 6.83 10,000 107 0 8 6.83 25,000 107 0 8 6.83 50,000 107 0 8 6.83 100,000 106 0 86.74



### 3 .6.5 Electronic Production The Technical Support Document for Process Emissions f rom Electronics Manufacture (S emiconductors, MEMs, Liquid Crystal Displays, and Photovoltaics) (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0009) examined emissions of high GWP gases for semicond uctor and related industry plants. Emissions from stationary fuel combustion were not included in the source category anal ys is, but were instead captured by the unspecified industrial stationary combustion analysis. EPA has followe d this approach here as well. Approximately

one million metric tons of SF 6 

### as CO 2 

### e were emitted from the semi conductor industry

in 2006 (Inventory

of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks : 1990

– 2007). This is equivalent to 46 short tons of SF 6 

### . The semiconductor industry uses multiple long

- lived fluorinated gases in plasma etching and plasma enhanced chemical vapor deposition (PECVD) processes to produce semiconductor products. These include PFCs, which are also used as heat transfer fluids. Approximately 3.5 million m etric tons of PFCs as CO 2 

### e were emitted from the semi conductor industry in 2006 (Inventory

of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks : 1990

– 2007).

### 28 Table 18 Electronic Production PFC Emissions
Semiconductor PFC 2006 CO 2 e Emissions ( million mtons ) PFC GWP 2006 PFC Emissions (tons ) CF 4 1.2 6,500 204 C 2 F 6 2.2 9,200 264 C 4 F 8 0.1 8,700 13 Total 3.5
-- 481


### Potential to Emit The Federal Reserve capacity utilization factor for the electronics industry in 2006 was 79.8 percent . Based on this capacity utilization factor the PTE of all of the semiconductor plants combined is estimated at 56 tons of SF 6 

### and 600 tons of PFC. EPA identified 216 facilities in the semiconductor

- electronics sector. Of these, the largest facility

emitted six percent of total semiconductor emissions on a CO 2 

### e basis (includes non - PFCs), which is a maximum of 30 tons of PFC. On a PTE basis, the largest facility would emit 36 tons, based on an assumption that the industry capacity is distributed similarly

to emissions. Therefo re no facility exceeds 100 tons per year on an actual or PTE basis for PFC

. New Units Growth for the industrial sector was estimated at

- 1.8 percent , and as such, no additional facilities were included in this analysis. Threshold Summary Electronics industry

emissions from plant processes only exceed emission thresholds on a CO 2 

### e basis. Facility

stationary

fuel combustion emissions are not included in the threshold comparisons for the industry

.

### 29 Table 19 CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary -- Electronics Production

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 199 0 5.948 250 19 1 0 5.94 7 1,000 159 0 5.934 5,000 109 0 5.819 10,000 88 0 5.701 25,000 65 0 5.399 50 ,000 54 0 5.100 100,000 22 0 3.417



### 3.6.6 Ethanol Production In the proposed GHG MRR, EPA determined that the sources of GHG emissions at ethanol production facilities that must be reported under the proposed rule are stationary fuel combustion, onsi te landfills, and onsite wastewater treatment. For the GHG MRR supporting anal ys is, data were unavailable to estimate facility emissions from these combined sources. Instead , data on stationary fuel combustion requirements for different plant capacities were used to estimate the minimum number of facilities that would meet each of the examined reporting rule facility

- level thresholds. CO 2 

### emissions from combustion constitute the majority of the GHG emissions from ethanol production and therefore provide an adequate measure for determining threshold counts.

### 30 Table 20 Ethanol Fuel Combustion CO 2 

### e Emissions by Plant Size (f rom the Proposed GHG MRR TSD Spreadsheet) Ethanol Produced (wet milling process) ( million gallons ) Coal Combustion Emissions ( mtons CO 2 e/year) Natural Gas Combustion Emissions ( mtons CO 2 e/y ea r) 290 1,519,585 853,536 245 1,283,787 721,091 200 1,047,990 588,646 200 1,047,990 588,646 100 523,995 294,323 85 445,396 250,174 40 209,598 117,729 35 183,398 103,013 20 104,799 58,865 2 .6 13,624 7,652


### Table 21 Proposed Reporting Rule Threshold Analysis Results Threshold CO 2 e (tons per y ear) Number of Existing Sources -- Actual Basis Percent of Existing National Sources* 1,000 101 72 % 10,000 93 66 % 25,000 86 61 % 100,000 43 31 %

* National ethanol production source population was estimated at 140 plants nationwide.


### Potential to Emit The permit threshold PTE anal ys is relied on this same approach and data. Therefore CH 4 

### emissions from onsite landfills and wastewater treatment plant digesters were not included in the PTE analysis, and we did not estimate emission coverage at each threshold. Also, the anal ys is for the proposed GHG MRR did not evaluate thresholds of 100, 250, 5 , 000, and 50,000 tons per ye ar. EPA assumed that al l existing plants would exceed the 100 and 250 ton per year thresholds

### 31

based on fuel combustion associated with the wet milling process. For the 5,000 and 50,000 thresholds , EPA included the number of sources exceeding the next highest threshold. For example, the count of sources exceeding the 5,000 tons p er year level onl y includes the sources exceeding the 1 0 ,000 ton threshold in the Technical Support Document for Ethanol Facilities: Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0010)

. New Units EPA estimates that ten new ethanol production facilities will be built per year. Threshold Summary
Table 2 2 CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary -- Ethanol

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New Sou rces Added p er Year 100 140 10 250 140 10 1,000 101 7 5,000 101 7 10,000 93 7 25,000 86 6 50,000 86 6 100,000 43 3



### 3.6.7 Ferroallo y Production In evaluating ferroalloy

production in the U

. S
. , EPA considered actual production at six facilities , as published in the U.S. Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks : 1990

– 2007 for 2006, and the capacity to produce at three facilities for which production information was not published due to competitive concerns. Potential to Emit EPA ' s PT E calculations consider the Federal Reserve ' s 2006 monthl y industrial capacity utilization estimates for the primary metals industry

classification which shows utilization at 85.9

### 32

percent for 2006. The PTE calculations do not affect the threshold anal ys is , because all facilities emit over 100,000 metric tons of CO 2 

### e per year. New Units Applying the growth factor for the industrial sector, 0.4 percent , results in no additional facilities for the anal ys is. Threshold Summary
Table 2 3

CO 2 

### Threshold Summ ary -- Ferroalloy Production

GHG Threshold (t ons p er y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 9 0 1.717 250 9 0 1.717 1,000 9 0 1.717 5,000 9 0 1.717 10,000 9 0 1.717 25,000 9 0 1.717 50,000 9 0 1.717 100,000 9 0 1.717


### Table 2 4 CH 4 

### Threshold Summary -- Ferroalloy Production

GHG Threshold (t ons p er y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities Added p er Year CH 4 Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 3 0 0.00 03 250 0 0 0

### 33 Table 2 5 CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary -- Ferroalloy Production

GHG Threshold (t ons p er y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 9 0 1.726 250 9 0 1.726 1,000 9 0 1.7 26 5,000 9 0 1.726 10,000 9 0 1.726 25,000 9 0 1.726 50,000 9 0 1.726 100,000 9 0 1.726



### 3.6.8 Food Processing Food processing includes meat, poultry and fruit and vegetable processing. Emissions derive from combustion and fugitive methane relate d to wastewater treatment. For purposes of this permit threshold analysis, EPA did not consider the fugitive methane from wastewater treatment because these are the onl y greenhouse gas emissions from the source category other than combustion, and food pro cessing is not a listed PSD source category . Consequently , emissions from this subsector considered in this analysis were limited to combustion emissions and were calculated using the MECS approach. Potential to Emit EPA used the Federal Reserve's 200 4 capacity utilization factor of 79.3 percent for the food industry

to calculate PTE emissions. New Units In addition, new establishments were calculated assuming a continuation of the growth rate of 1.2 percent , as calculated using the methodology des cribed earlier in this document.

### 34

Threshold Summary
Table 2 6

CO 2 

### Threshold Summary -- Food Processing

GHG Threshold (t ons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emissions Covered (Tg p er y ear) 100 3946 47 16.848 250 2281 27 16.709 1,000 1 499 18 16.379 5,000 1030 12 15.723 10,000 749 9 14.354 25,000 482 6 12. 257 50,000 10 0 0.596 100,000 0 0 0



### 3.6.9 Glass Manufacturing EPA used the Supporting Data f or Threshold Analysis Subpart E

– W, Greenhous e Gas Mandatory Reporting Rulemaking, March 10, 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0046.7), to anal yz e emissions for permit thresholds from glass manufacturing . Annual fuel combustion and glass production are estimated for each plant based on 2004 estimated plant sales and 2002 MECS energy

intensity (energy per sales dollars). The spreadsheet shows CO 2 

### emission estimates from industrial process es and stationary fuel combustion , as well as CH 4 

### and N 2 

### O emission estimates from stationary fuel combustion. Potentia l to Emit Plant capacities are not available in the spreadsheet. To estimate PTE , EPA divided the actual annual emissions by a capacity utilization factor of 0. 50 or 50 percent. New Units EPA used an estimated annual growth rate of 0.4 percent for the nonmetallic mineral product manufacturing sector to determine the number of new units for this analysis.

### 35

Threshold Summary
Table 2 7

CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary -- Glass Manufacturing

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 36 9 1 4.425 250 36 4 1 4.42 5 1,000 222 1 4.341 5,000 20 1 1 4. 302 10,000 17 5 1 4. 162 25,000 104 0 3.277 50,000 21 0 1. 208 100,000 3 0 0. 366



### 3.6.10 HCFC
- 22 Production Chlorodif luoromethane (HCFC

- 22) is produced for use in refrigeration and air conditioning systems and as a chemical feedstock for manufacturing s ynthetic poly mers. Because HCFC
- 22 depletes stratospheric ozone, its production for non

- feedstock uses is scheduled to be phased out by 2020 under the U.S. Clean Air Act. Feedstock production, however, is permitted to continue indefinitely

. A high global warming potential ( GWP ) greenhouse gas , trifluoromethane (HFC

- 23), is generated as a b y

product during the manufacture of HCFC

- 22. Emissions of HFC

- 23 in 2006 were estimated to be 13.8 million metric tons on a CO 2 

### e basis from three HCFC

- 22 production plants. Estimates were based on the plants operating at capacity . Annual emissions in terms of both metric tons CO 2 

### e and tons HFC
- 23 are summarized in Table 30 below.

### 36 Table 28 HCFC - 22 Production HFC - 23 Emissions

HCFC - 22 Production 2006 CO 2 e Emissions ( million metric tons ) HFC GWP 2006 HFC Emissions ( short tons ) HFC
- 23 13.8 11,700 1,300 Source: Reporting Rule TSD


### P otential to Emit Confidential business information (CBI) claims on production information limited EPA ' s PTE analysis. The T

echnical Support Document for Emissions of HFC

- 23 from Production of HCFC

- 22: Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
2008
- 0508
- 0015) estimated that all three plants emit over 100,000 metric tons CO 2 

### e on a capacity basis by a factor of 85 or more, or a minimum of 800 short tons of HFC

- 23. These estimates did not account for HFC

- 23 capture and destructio n at two of the three plants. Therefore , actual emissions at two of the plants will be lower, and can be limited through permitting. We assumed that all three plants exceed the 100 and 250 ton actual and PTE thresholds, and that one plant (uncontrolled) exceeds the 1 , 000 ton PTE threshold. Because the TSD did not include estimates of CO 2 

### emissions from fuel combustion, and the CBI claims noted above, the PTE anal ys is does not quantify fuel combustion emissions specificall y for the three plants. Station ary fuel combustion emissions from the plants were instead captured under the anal ys is for unspecified industrial stationary combustion. New Units U.S. production between 1990 and 2006 increased by 11 percent while emissions declined b y 62 percent . Th e declines in emissions from control equipment and process changes offset the production increases. Therefore we did not estimate any new facilities o r modifications that would increase facility emissions more than 100 tons per year.

### 37

Threshold Summary
Table 29

HFC Threshold Summary - - HCFC - 22 Production

GHG Threshold (t ons p er y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities Added p er Year HFC Emissions Covered (Tg p er y ear) 100 3 0 0.001 250 3 0 0.001 1,000 1 0 0.001 5,000 0 0 0


### Tab le 3 0 CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary -- HCFC - 22 Production

GHG Threshold (t ons p er y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities A dded p er Year CO 2 e Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 3 0 13.848 250 3 0 13.848 1,000 3 0 13.848 5,000 3 0 13.848 10,000 3 0 13.848 25,000 3 0 13.848 50,000 3 0 13.848 100,000 3 0 13.848



### 3.6.11 Hydrogen Production EPA estimated CO 2 

### emissions from merchant hydrogen production using the process and combustion ratio of 8.62 tons of CO 2 

### emissions per ton of hydrogen production. About 95 percent of all hydrogen (not just merchant hydrogen) produced in the U.S. today is made from natural gas via steam methane reforming. In steam methane reforming fueled by natural gas combustion, the process and combustion emissi ons go up the same stack from the boiler/reformer unit. Because the emissions are predominately process emissions and because

### 38

the natural gas combustion products are emitted from the same stack, EPA has treated all the emissions as process emissions. Pot ential to Emit EPA developed estimates assuming hydrogen production at capacity level. Therefore, no adjustment to the emissions estimates is needed to account for PTE emissions

. New Units Based on the industry

growth factor of

- 0.1 percent for chemical manufacturing, EPA assumed that no new plants would be constructed. Threshold Summary
Table 3 1

CO 2 

### Threshold Summary -- Hydrogen Production

GHG Threshold (t ons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emi ssions Covered (Tg p er y ear) 100 75 0 15.227 250 75 0 15.227 1,000 74 0 15. 226 5,000 62 0 15.202 10,000 51 0 15.130 25,000 42 0 15.007 50,000 38 0 14.8 90 100,000 32 0 14. 441



### 3.6.12 Iron and Steel Production EPA used the Supporting Data f or T hreshold Analysis Subpart E

– W, Greenhouse Gas Mandatory Reporting Rulemaking, March 10, 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0046.7) for the proposed GHG MRR threshold anal ys is to determine process and combustion CO 2 

### and process CH 4 

### . The iron and steel production source category includes taconite iron ore processing facilities, integrated iron and steel making facilities, electric arc furnace (EAF) steelmaking facilities that are not located at integrated iron and steel facilities, and coke oven facilities that

### 39

are not located at integrated iron and steel facilities. Facility processes and facilities covered in the spreadsheet are shown in the table below. Table 32 Iron and Steel Processes, Facilities, and Capacity Information Iron and Steel Process Number of Facilities Capacity Information Basic oxygen furnace (BOF) 18 Yes Blast Furnace (BF) 17 Yes Sintering 5 Yes Coke ovens 18 Yes Electric arc furnace (EAF) 92 No Taconite furnace 8 Yes Integrated steel plant fuel combustion* 19 No Coke oven gas combustio n* 9 No EAF steel plant fuel combustion 92 No

* Six plants had emissions from coke oven gas combustion was included in integrated steel plant fuel combustion.


### Potential to Emit The anal ys is covered 130 plants, and in all cases , except for EAF plants , GHG emissions were estimated based on operations at plant capacity . For EAF plants, EPA used the 2007 Federal Reserve industrial capacity utilization percentage of 86.6 percent for primary metal

- - iron and steel production, to adjust estimated actual emissions to PTE. The spreadsheet contained emission CO 2 

### e estimates which included CO 2 

### , CH 4 

### , and N 2 

### O emissions . Process CH 4 

### emissions were backed out of the CO 2 

### e totals using the process CH 4 

### emissions reported in the U

. S
. GHG Inventory , and apportioning these emissions to the different plants based on their capacity in those processes. N 2 

### O emissions are primarily related to fuel combustion and were not backed out for separate treatment. New Units No new iron and steel facilities are expected to be built. The growth rate in primary metals from the Economi c Census data is only about 0.4 percent

.

### 40

Threshold Summary
Table 3 3

CO 2 

### Threshold Summary -- Iron and Steel Production

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities Added per y ear CO 2 Emissions

Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 130 0 85.150 250 130 0 85.150 1,000 130 0 85.150 5,000 129 0 85.148 10,000 128 0 85.141 25,000 123 0 85.057 50,000 116 0 84.831 100,000 113 0 84.655


### Table 3 4 CH 4 

### Threshold Summary - - Iron and Steel Production

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year CH 4 Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 18 0 0.034 250 17 0 0.033 1,000 1 7 0 0.03 3 5,000 3 0 0.011 10,000 0 0 0

### 41 Table 3 5 CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary -- Iron and Steel Production

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 130 0 85.151 250 130 0 85.151 1,000 130 0 85.151 5,000 1 30 0 85.1 51 10,000 128 0 85.141 25,000 123 0 85.058 50,000 116 0 84.832 100,000 11 4 0 84.656



### 3.6.13 Lead Production According to the 2006 U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), lead production in the U

. S
. includes both the primary , direct smelting (one fa cility) and secondary lead production (16 facilities). Process emissions of CO 2 

### are a b yproduct of the coke consumed during the smelting or reforming processes. EPA calculated total process emissions based on lead production as reported in the USGS. In the Supporting Data for Threshold Analysis Subpart E

– W, Greenhouse Gas Mandatory Reporting Rulemaking (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0046.7), combustion emissions are combined with process emissions to determine total actual emissions. Potential to Emit In order to determine PTE emissions, EPA considered the Federal Reserve ' s 2006 monthly industrial capacity

utilization estimates for primary metals industry classification which shows utilization at 85.9 percent for 20 06, and adjusted to achieve 100 percent uti lization. New Units EPA assumed no new facilities would be added for the industry , given an expected growth rate of 0.4 percent per year for primary metal manufacturing industry

.

### 42

Threshold Summary
Table 3 6

CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary -- Lead Production

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 17 0 0.861 250 17 0 0.861 1,000 17 0 0.861 5,000 17 0 0.861 10,000 16 0 0.855 25,000 13 0 0.799 50,000 12 0 0.761 100,000 1 0 0.089



### 3.6.14 Lime The Supporting Data f

or Threshold Analysis Subpart E

– W, Greenhouse Gas Mandatory Reporting Rulemaking, March 10, 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0046.7) was also used to estimate GHG PTE for lime plants

. Potential to Emit To estimate PTE , EPA divided annual actual CO 2 

### emissions from the calcining process and fuel combustion emissions of CO 2 

### , CH4 

### , and N 2 

### O by regional capacity factors available in the spreadsheet for each plant. The capacity factors ranged from 43 to 136 percent
. New Units EPA assumed no new facilities would be added for the industry

.

### 43

Threshold Summary
Table 3 7

CO 2 

### Threshold Summary -- Lim e Production

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 89 0 27.262 250 89 0 27.262 1,000 89 0 27.262 5,000 89 0 27.262 10,000 89 0 27.262 25,000 86 0 27.237 50,000 66 0 26.533 100,000 60 0 26.180



### 3.6.15 Magnesium Production and Processing The magnesium metal production (primary and secondary) and casting industry typicall y uses SF 6 

### as a cover gas to prevent the rapid oxidation and burning of molten magnesium in the presence of air. A dilute gaseous mixture of SF 6 

### with dry air and/or CO 2 

### is blown over molten magnesium metal to induce and stabilize the formation of a protective crust. A small portion of the SF 6 

### reacts with the magnesium to form a thin molecular film of mostly magnesium oxide and magnesium fluoride. The amount of SF 6 

### reacting in magnes ium production and processing is being studied but presently assumed to be negligible, and therefore all SF 6 

### used is assumed to be emitted into the atmosphere. For the proposed GHG MRR Technical Support Document for Process Emissions from Magnesium Produ ction and Processing : Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases , EPA reported that national annual SF 6 

### emissions from magnesium production and processing totaled approximately 3.2 million metric tons CO 2 

### e in 2006. The facility population total ed 13 facilities that emitted 3.0 million metric tons CO 2 

### e. The SF 6 

### emissions (no GWP adjustment) were 148 and 138 short tons respectivel y. Ten magnesium die casting facilities accounted for 29 percent (44 tons), and primary and secondary production accounted for 64 percent (96 tons) of the total emissions. Other small casting activities account ed for the remaining 7 percent (ten tons).

### 44

Potential to Emit EPA used the anal ys is in the TSD for the proposed GHG MRR, where EPA had evaluated threshol ds of 1,000, 10,000, 25,000, and 100,000 metric tons per year. Facility- level information is not made publicly available because of confidential business information (CBI) claims. From that earlier anal ys is EPA estimated that the same number of facilitie s exceeded the 100, 250, and 1,000 tons CO 2 

### e per year PTE threshold as determined in the GHG MRR TSD for the 1,000 metric tons per year threshold. In a similar fashion, EPA used the GHG MRR TSD facility counts at 10,000 metric tons CO 2 

### e per year to estimate facilities at the 5,000 tons per ye ar PTE threshold, and 100,000 metric tons per ye ar for the 50,000 tons CO 2 

### e per year PTE threshold. The permit threshold anal ys is did not include CO 2 

### emissions from fuel combustion. That information was not available in the TSD for the proposed GHG MRR. On an SF 6 

### mass basis, the average emissions per facility are onl y 11 tons of SF 6 

### , well below 100 tons per ye ar. Therefore we assumed that none of the facilities have a potential to emit more than 100 tons per year of SF 6 

### . New Units EPA assumed no new units would be added for the sector. Threshold Summary
Table 38

CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary -- Magnesium Production

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 13 0 2.955 250 13 0 2.955 1,000 13 0 2.955 5,000 11 0 2.94 10,000 11 0 2.94 25,000 11 0 2.94 50,000 9 0 2.781 100,000 9 0 2.781

### 45

3.6.16 Nitric Acid Production EPA used the 2006 nameplate capacity (metric tons of HNO 3 

### 100 percent acid basis) for 45 nitric acid plants and 2006 acid production from the GHG MRR TSD supporting spreadsheet (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0046.7) to determine N 2 

### O emissions. Potential to Emit The GHG PTE was calculated by multiplying ac tual N 2 

### O emissions as CO 2 

### e by the ratio of nameplate capacity

to 2006 production. The permit threshold analysis, based on the GHG MRR TSD, does not include GHG emissions from co

- located stationary combustion units . Also the permit threshold analysis does not account for o verlap between facilities in the Nitric Acid and Ammonia categories , which have both ammonia and nitric acid production processes. New Units EPA assumed no new units would be constructed for this sector. Threshold Summary
Table 39

N 2 

### O Threshold Summary -- Nitric Acid Production

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year N 2 O Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 43 0 0.055 250 42 0 0.055 1,000 27 0 0.049 5,000 4 0 0.016 10,0 00 0 0 0 25,000 0 0 0 50,000 0 0 0 100,000 0 0 0

### 46 Table 4 0 CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary -- Nitric Acid Production

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 45 0 17.732 250 45 0 17.732 1,000 45 0 17.732 5,000 45 0 17.732 10,000 45 0 17.732 25,000 44 0 17.724 50,000 43 0 17.706 100,000 42 0 17.667



### 3.6.17 Petrochemical Production EPA determined that the portion of the petrochemical production sector most relevant for permit threshold anal ys is includes the manufacture and production of acrylonitrile, carbon black, ethylene, ethylene dichloride, ethyl ene oxide, and methanol, because the IPCC considers production of greenhouse gases from these processes significant compared to other petrochemical processes. Emissions from the manufacturing processes vary significantl y and process emissions take many forms. Process emissions include direct oxidation of CO 2 

### , off

- gassing of CH 4 

### and CO 2 

### , and the direct release of CO 2 

### and CH 4 

### from equipment leaks. Process emissions are the primary consideration for acrylonitrile, ethylene, and ethylene oxide processes. In addition, some processes require combustion of supplemental fuel. Both process and combustion emiss ions are significant for carbon black and methanol processes. Potential to Emit EPA ' s analysis assumed petrochemical production at the capacity level. Therefore, no adjustment to the emissions estimates is needed to account for PTE. New Units Base d on an industry

growth factor of

- 0.1 percent for chemical manufacturing, EPA assumed that no new plants would be constructed.

### 47

Threshold Summary
Table 4 1

CO 2 

### Threshold Summary -- Petrochemical Production

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existi ng Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 98 0 52.081 250 98 0 52.081 1,000 98 0 52.081 5,000 97 0 52.080 10,000 96 0 52.073 25,000 96 0 52.073 50,000 94 0 52.005 100,000 91 0 51.806


### Table 4 2 CH 4 

### Threshold Summary -- Petrochemical Production

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year C H 4 Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 55 0 0.130 250 52 0 0.129 1,000 37 0 0.121 5,000 5 0 0.035 10, 000 1 0 0.010 25,000 0 0 0 50,000 0 0 0 100,000 0 0 0

### 48 Table 4 3 CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary -- Petrochemical Production

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emissions

Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 98 0 54.826 250 98 0 54.826 1,000 98 0 54.826 5,000 97 0 54.825 10,000 96 0 54.818 25,000 96 0 54.818 50,000 94 0 54.748 100,000 91 0 54.595



### 3.6.18 Petroleum Refineries In developing the permit threshold anal ys is for petroleum refineries , EPA quantified CH 4 

### process emissions from wastewater, fugitive, flares, and storage tanks. Process CO 2 

### emissions derived from flares, hydrogen plant emissions, and sulfur plant emissions. In addition, on

- site combustion emissions were calculated considering fuel consumed b y type. Potential to Emit EPA assumed that petroleum refineries were operating at capacity level. Therefore, no adjustment to the emissions estimates was needed to account for PTE. New Units According to the ICR prepared for th e New Source Performance Standard (NSPS), EPA expects that no new refineries will be built over the next few year s.

### 49

Threshold Summary
Table 4 4

CO 2 

### Threshold Summary -- Petroleum Refineries

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Numbe r of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 Emissions

Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 150 0 202.947 250 150 0 202.947 1,000 150 0 202.947 5,000 150 0 202.947 10,000 149 0 202.938 25,000 146 0 202.887 50,000 137 0 202.575 100,000 129 0 202.065


### Table 4 5 CH 4 

### Threshold Summary -- Petroleum Refineries

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year C H 4 Emissions

Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 129 0 0.083 250 109 0 0.080 1,000 31 0 0.042 5,000 0 0 0

### 50 Table 4 6 CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary -- Petroleum Refineries

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 150 0 204.897 250 150 0 204.897 1,000 150 0 204.897 5,000 150 0 204.897 10,000 149 0 204.888 25,000 146 0 204.835 50,000 13 7 0 204. 513 100,000 12 9 0 203.988



### 3.6.19 Phosphoric Acid Production Phosphoric acid is produced b y combining sulfuric acid and phosphate rock. CO 2 

### is emitted when the limestone component of phosphate rock reacts with the sulfuric acid. Potential to Emit When these process emissions are combined with combustion emissions, all 14 plants have emissions that exceed the highest threshold level; consequentl y, no PTE anal ys is was required. New Units Based on an industry

growth factor of

- 0.1 percent for chemical manufacturing, EPA assumed that no new plants would be constructed.

### 51

Threshold Summary
Table 4 7

CO 2 

### Threshold Summary -- Phosphoric Acid Production

GHG Threshold (tons per y ea r) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 14 0 3.838 250 14 0 3.838 1,000 14 0 3.838 5,000 14 0 3.838 10,000 14 0 3.838 25,000 14 0 3.838 50,000 14 0 3.838 100,000 14 0 3.838



### 3.6.20 Pulp and Paper Manufacturing Permit threshold analysis for this sector is focused on the energy intensive, fugitive emitting pulp, paper, and paperboard manufacturing subsectors. Process emissions include CO 2 

### which is emitted in the recovery cyc le at kraft and soda facilities associated with the chemical pulp process. The CO 2 

### emitted from kraft mill lime kilns originates from two sources : (1) fossil fuels burned in the kiln; and (2) conversion of calcium carbonate (or " lime mud " ) generated in the recovery

process to calcium oxide. The bulk of the emissions considered derive from combustion. Many boilers use biomass fuel, and the burning of spent pulping liquors to produce steam for facility processes is considered biomass combustion for the GH G MRR. The emissions numbers considered for the permit threshold anal ys is are non

-biogenic (net of any biogenic emissions). Considering only non -biogenic emissions, 96.5 percent of the facilities and 99.7 percent of the emissions are captured b y all of the thresholds proposed for consideration of the permit threshold rule. Potential to Emit Because 99.7 percent of emissions were captured at even the highest threshold, no additional PTE estimate was calculated in this analysis.

### 52

New Units Based on an industry

growth factor of

- 2.5 percent for paper manufacturing, and previous EPA anal ys is for the pulp and paper NSPS I CR, EPA assumed that no new plants would be constructed. Threshold Summary
Table 48

CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary -- Pulp and Paper Manufactu ring

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 425 0 57.700 250 425 0 57.700 1,000 425 0 57.700 5,000 425 0 57.700 10,000 425 0 57.700 25,000 425 0 57 .700 50,000 422 0 57.688 100,000 410 0 57.527



### 3.6.21 Silicon Carbide Manufacturing In 2006, one facility

produced silicon carbide in the U.S. Silicon carbide is primarily an industrial abrasive manufactured from silica sand or quartz and petroleum coke. Approximately 35 percent of the carbon from the petroleum coke is retained with the silicon carbide, and the rest is emitted as both CO 2 

### and CH 4 

### . In addition, emissions from combusti on account for approximately

ten percent of total emissions. Po tential to Emit Emissions from this plant exceed all permit threshold levels; as a result, EPA did not consider PTE calculations. New Units EPA assumed there would be no new facilities constructed.

### 53

Threshold Summary
Table 49

CO 2 

### Threshold Summary - - Silicon Carbide Manufacturing

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 1 0 0.101 250 1 0 0.101 1,000 1 0 0.101 5,000 1 0 0.101 10,000 1 0 0.101 25,0 00 1 0 0.101 50,000 1 0 0.101 100,000 1 0 0.101


### Table 5 0 CH 4 

### Threshold Summary -- Silicon Carbide Manufacturing

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year C H 4 Emissions

Covered (Tg per y ear) 1 00 1 0 0.0004 250 1 0 0.0004 1,000 0 0 0

### 54 Table 5 1 CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary -- Silicon Carbide Manufacturing

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emissions

Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 1 0 0.109 250 1 0 0.109 1,000 1 0 0.109 5,000 1 0 0.109 10,000 1 0 0.109 25,000 1 0 0.109 50,000 1 0 0.109 100,000 1 0 0.109



### 3.6.22 Soda Ash Production Soda Ash production emissions were nearl y evenly split between process and combustion emission s. Process emissions result from calcining trona ore to produce soda ash. Potential to Emit PTE emissions were calculated based on the capacities of the production units. New Units In 2006, there was a glut of soda ash in the domestic market; EPA assumed no new units would be constructed.

### 55

Threshold Summary
Table 5 2

CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary -- Soda Ash Production

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 5 0 3.121 250 5 0 3.121 1,000 5 0 3.121 5,000 5 0 3.121 10,000 5 0 3.121 25,000 5 0 3.121 50,000 5 0 3.121 100,000 5 0 3.121



### 3.6.23 Titanium Dioxide Production EPA used USGS as the source for production capacity for the eight facilities that produced titanium dioxide in 2006

. Potential to Emit Emissions were assumed to represent PTE operating levels. New Units EPA assumed that no new plants would be constructed.

### 56

Threshold Summary
Table 5 3

CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary -- Titanium Dioxid e Production

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 8 0 3.686 250 8 0 3.686 1,000 8 0 3.686 5,000 8 0 3.686 10,000 8 0 3.686 25,000 8 0 3.686 50,0 00 8 0 3.686 100,000 7 0 3.628



### 3.6.24 Zinc Production The Zinc production emissions and facility count estimates include process and combustion emissions associated with primary smelting and secondary

recycling facilities. Potential to Emit For PTE estimates, EPA considered the Federal Reserve ' s 2006 monthl y industrial capacity utilization estimates for primary metals industry

classification which shows utilization at 85.9 percent for 2006, and ad justed to achieve 100 percent utilization. New Units EPA assumed that no new units would be constructed.

### 57

Threshold Summary
Table 5 4

CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary -- Zinc Production

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 9 0 0.852 250 9 0 0.852 1,000 9 0 0.852 5,000 9 0 0.852 10,000 8 0 0.843 25,000 5 0 0.802 50,000 5 0 0.802 100,000 5 0 0. 802


### 3.7 Energy Sector
3.7.1 Oil and Gas Systems In consideration of the permit thresholds, EPA consi dered the Fugitive Emissions Reporting from the Petroleum and Natural Gas Industry: Background Technical Support Document (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0023) . This document details combustion emissions and fugitive emissions from offshore petroleum and natural g as facilities, onshore natural gas processors, onshore natural gas transmission, underground natural gas storage, and liquid natural gas storage. EPA determined that oil and gas exploration, development, transmission, and distribution are not listed PSD s ource categories, and therefore fugitive emissions from these activities were not considered for PSD applicability as it relates to major source thresholds

. EPA ' s analysis focused on combustion emissions from these sources. Potential to Emit EPA used a ca

pacity utilization figure of 50 percent to determine PTE emission estimates and counts. This rate is meant to reasonably represent an average utilization rate across a variety of combustion equipment ty pes used in the oil and gas industry subsectors des cribed above. New Units

### 58

EPA determined new units based on a growth factor of 1.0 percent for the sector. Threshold Summary
Table 5 5

CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary -- Oil and Gas Systems

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 4762 48 88.264 250 4762 48 88.264 1,000 4762 48 88.264 5,000 3722 37 86.192 10,000 3095 31 83.619 25,000 2496 25 79.386 50,000 1045 1 0 56.949 100,000 387 4 32.750



### 3.7.2 Underground Coal Mining GHG emissions from underground coal mining include CH 4 

### fugitive emissions released from the coal seam and surrounding rock during mining and post

- mining activities (coal bed CH 4 

### ), and fuel combustion emissions of CO 2 

### , CH4 

### , and N 2 

### O. Fu gitive CH 4 

### , emissions are captured and vented b y ventilation systems and degassing s ys tems. C aptured and vented CH 4 

### emissions from active mines were considered in the PTE anal ys is. Because underground coal mining is not one of the 28 PSD source categorie s for which fugitive emissions were required to be included in the emissions determination , f ugitive emissions from post mining operations, surface mines, and inactive mines were not included in the permit thresholds analysis

. The Technical Support Docu ment for Underground Coal Mines: Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0032) identified 612 active underground coal mining facilities but analysis of CH4 

### emissions was limited to 128 " gass y " mines where CH 4 

### monito ring was already in place ( due to existing CH 4 

### emissions above Mine Safety and Health Adminis tration (MSHA) threshold levels). The U.S

. GHG Inventory (EPA, 2008) reports that 233 underground coal mines ( including 133 gass y mines ) ventilated CH 4 

### in 2007. Fuel combu stion emission estimates for the GHG MRR TSD from all underground coal mines , based on U.S. Census energy use data, were found to comprise between one and

### 59

three percent of total CO 2 

### e emissions, with coal bed CH 4 

### accounting for the bulk of GHG emi ssions. In addition to the emissions data on the 128 gass y mines contained in the GHG MRR TSD, EPA considered combustion emissions from 289 bituminous underground coal mines , using U.S. Census data from 2002
. Potential to Emit CH 4 

### CH 4 

### emission estimates that were developed for the GHG MRR TSD were used for both actual emissions and PTE emissions permit threshold analysis

. EPA assumed that venting and degassing were continuous throughout the ye ar ; therefore , actual emission estimates equal PTE emissio n estimates . The estimates considered 128 gass y mines, which were assumed to be the largest emitters of vented CH 4 

### . The smallest mine of this group had annual CH 4 

### emissions of 26 tons ; therefore EPA assumed that the annual CH 4 

### emissions from the 105 vent ed mines that were not included in the TSD anal ys is were less than 26 tons

. CO 2 

### CO 2 

### emissions were estimated in the same manner as for other Unspecified Industrial Stationary

Combustion categories, based on the ICF anal ys is (ICF, 2007) using the MECS approach . Emissions were estimated based on Census information including fuel consumption per emplo yee and the distribution of establishments by the number of employees. PTE was estimated by

using a capacity

utilization factor of 86.3 percent as publish ed by the Federal Reserve
. New Units The number of underground bituminous coal mines in the U.S. is on the decline. EIA data show that only

Colorado had an increase in the number of underground coal mines between 2006 and 2007 (EIA, 2008). The EIA data show that overall the number of underground coal mines decreased from 2006 to 2007 by eight percent; consequently , EPA assumed no new underground mines would be built. http://www.eia .doe.gov/cneaf/coal/page/acr/table1.html

.

### 60

Threshold Summaries Threshold summary

tables are shown below for CH 4 

### (vented fugitive emissions), CO 2 

### (fuel combustion), and CO 2 

### e (vented fugitive CH 4 

### and combustion CO 2 

### ).
Table 5 6 CO 2 

### Threshold Summary -- Un derground Coal Mining

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 238 0 0.783 250 202 0 0.778 1,000 63 0 0.692 5,000 30 0 0.577 10,000 30 0 0.577 25,000 0 0 0


### Table 57 CH 4 

### Threshold Summary - - Underground Coal Mining

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 e Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 110 0 1.586 250 110 0 1.586 1,000 110 0 1.5 86 5,000 53 0 1.420 10,000 38 0 1.361 25,000 24 0 1.147 50,000 13 0 0.784 100,000 1 0 0.105

### 61 Table 58 CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary - - Underground Coal Mining

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Ye ar CO 2 e Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 238 0 39.520 250 238 0 39.520 1,000 126 0 33.945 5,000 124 0 33.943 10,000 123 0 33.936 25,000 103 0 33.606 50,000 78 0 32.800 100,000 55 0 31.241


### 3.8 Waste Sector
3.8.1 Landfills The landfill PT E anal ys is includes both municipal solid waste (MSW) landfills and onsite industrial landfills associated with pulp and paper and food processing. The anal ys is used a modification of the landfill emission modeling approach used for the proposed GHG MRR threshold anal ys is. Like the GHG MRR anal ys is , th e permit threshold PTE anal ys is did not include onsite industrial landfills for ethanol processing facilities or industrial land application systems. GHG Emissions D ecomposition of waste in landfills gen erates CH 4 

### and CO 2 

### . The amount of CH 4 

### generated from a given landfill is a function of several factors : the total amount of waste disposed in the landfill; t

he characteristics of the waste; and the climatic conditions. The amount of CH 4 

### emitted is the amount of CH 4 

### generated minus the amount of CH 4 

### oxidized by aerobic microorganisms in the landfill cover material. Also subtracted from the total is the amount of CH 4 

### that is destroyed b y combustion of the vented gas. The CO 2 

### produced by decaying waste is not considered an anthropogenic emission, and is not counted in GHG emission totals. Likewise, CO 2 

### resulting from the combustion of landfill CH4 

### is not accounted for as an anthropogenic emission under international accounting guidance.

### 62

According to the 2008 U.S. Inventory , MSW landfills emitted 111.2 million metric tons CH 4 

### ( CO 2 

### e basis) in 2006

. The majority of the CH 4 

### emissions from on

- site industrial landfills occur s at pulp and paper facilities and food processing facilities. In 2006, these landfil ls emitted 14.6 million metric tons CO 2 

### e P otential to E mit The methodology

used for the proposed GHG MRR threshold analy sis was also used to estimate CH 4 

### generation rates and emissions in 2006 for the PTE anal ys is. A landfill

- specific model developed by EPA to support its proposed GHG MRR was used to estimate CH 4 

### generation and potential generation from municipal landfills. The generation estimate was adjusted with assumptions on oxidation in landfill cover, and destruction b y combustion for energy re covery or flaring. The industrial landfill generation and emission estimates are based on the U.S. GHG Inventory . Industrial landfills were assumed not to have energy recovery or flaring, so there was no difference between generation and emissions. New Units EPA did not estimate the number of new facilities added each ye ar with CH 4 

### emissions above the different thresholds due to the time delay between landfill construction and emission generation. Threshold Summary
Table 59 CO 2 

### e Threshold Summary -- Landfills

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources CO 2 e Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 4 , 131 125.621 250 4 , 117 125.619 1,000 4 , 053 125.592 5,000 3 , 564 124.552 10,000 3 , 265 122.788 25,000 2 , 701 115.937 50,000 1 , 684 92.340 100,000 967 72.722

### 63 Table 60 C H 4 

### Threshold Summary -- Landfills

GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources C H 4 Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 3,885 5.973 250 3,562 5.931 1,000 2,692 5.539 5,000 981 3.274 10,000 427 2.326 25,00 0 114 1.087 50,000 21 0.401 100,000 2 0.106



### 3.8.2 Municipal Solid Waste Combustors The threshold anal ys is for the proposed GHG MRR included municipal solid waste combustors (MWC) in the general stationary fuel combustion category . The anal ys is use d the e GRID database, which is discussed in the PTE methodology description for electric generating units. Data and Methodology EPA used the latest version of the e GRID database (2006) to estimate the PTE of MWC facilities and counts of facilities abov e the different emission thresholds. The e GRID database includes year 2004 characteristics, operating information, and annual CO 2 

### emissions for U.S. facilities that have a generation capacity greater than one MW and sell electric power to the grid. By us ing e GRID , EPA assumed that all MWC facilities sell power to the grid. Potential to Emit EPA identified 75 MWC facilities based on the generator primary fuel in the generator table (primary

fuel equals MSW) in the e GRID database . The e GRID database contains CO 2 

### annual emissions estimates for the facilities. For CO 2 

### emissions, e GRID uses a standard assumption that 70 percent of the heat value of the waste stream comes from renewable materials and 30 percent comes from nonrenewable material s. The renewa ble fraction has a CO 2 

### emission rate of zero ; therefore, the PTE threshold anal ys is is based on the nonrenewable or fossil fraction assumption. EPA estimated PTE by dividing the annual emissions from eGRID by the e GRID plant capacity

factor.

### 64

New Units To determine the number of new per year at different thresholds , EPA counted the number of generators online each ye ar, and totaled the nameplate capacity for each online year. This information was compared to the total facility nameplate capacity , and th e PTE for the increased capacity was calculated b y multiplying the facility PTE by the fraction of nameplate capacity associated with the new generators. EPA counted the facilities that exceeded the PTE thresholds during each period, and computed a 15

- ye ar average to determine the number of new or modified facilities per year. Threshold Summary
Table 61

CO 2 

### Threshold Summary -- Municipal Solid Waste Combustors -
GHG Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 75 2 6.255 250 75 2 6.255 1,000 75 2 6.255 5,000 75 2 6.255 10,000 75 2 6.255 25,000 74 2 6.24 50,000 67 1 6.071 100,000 40 1 4.958


### 3.9 Agriculture ( Stationary Fuel Combustion) The anal ys is for the Agriculture sector was limited to stationary fuel combustion CO 2 

### emissions from internal combustion diesel engine generators. Fugitive emissions of CH 4 

### from enteric fermentation, and CO 2 

### , CH 4 

### , and N2 

### O from manure management were not included becau se farms and related operations are not in the 28 PSD source categories that require quantification of fugitive emission PTE for determining major source status, and because of the large uncertainties and lack of information on determining what component o f the non

combustion emissions at agricultural operations would be defined as non

- fugitive for PSD purposes . Fuel combustion for building space heating and other farm purposes were not included in the estimates, but would be a component of farm PTE.

### 65

Da ta and Methodology EPA used the 2007 I CF analysis to estimate the number of farms covered by the different thresholds (I CF, 2007). Emissions from diesel generators on farms were estimated using data on the average generator size in Delaware (EEA, 2004), and data on energy use on farms for non

transport/non

- machinery

motors (Brown and Neal 2005). Using these data, EPA estimated the number of diesel generators on farms and apportioned the generators across farm sizes, assuming no farm has more than one generator. Potential to Emit EPA assumed that a high proportion of farms would run the generators infrequently, and a smaller proportion would have a generator as the only power source, requiring nearl y constant operation. EPA used this distribution to determine actual and potential emissions, with PTE emissions based on the assumption that the generators ran 24 hours per day, 365 days per ye ar. EPA recognizes that this approach underestimates the PTE for all farm stationary fuel combustion sources, b ecause it is limited to diesel engine generators used primarily to run pumps and motors, and does not include additional sources such as fuel combustion for drying and curing, space heating, and water heating. New Units New generator installations were estimated based on information in the Regulatory Impact Anal ys is (RIA) for the spark ignition stationary combustion engine NSPS and area NESHAPS (EPA, 2007). The on

- farm engine population of diesel generators used for irrigation increased four percent be tween 1998 and 2003 , or about 0.8 percent annually

.

### 66

Threshold Summary
Table 62

CO 2 

### Threshold Summary -- Farm Stationary IC Engines

CO 2 Threshold (t ons p er y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New Engines Added p er Year CO 2 Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 37,351 299 0.512 250 37,351 299 0.512 1,000 0 0 0 5,000 0 0 0 10,000 0 0 0 25,000 0 0 0 50,000 0 0 0 100,000 0 0 0


### 3.10 Commercial Stationary Fuel Combustion Data Source EPA used EIA ' s Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey

(CBECS) to estimate commercial sector stationary fuel combustion GHG emissions and PTE. CBECS is a national sample survey

that collects information on the stock of U.S. commercial buildings, their energy

related building characteristics, and their energy consumption and expenditures. Commercial buildings include all buildings in which at least half of the floor space is used for a purpose that is not residential, industrial, or agricultural ; thus, the source category includes building ty pes that might not traditionally

be considered " commercial, " such as schools, correctional institutions, and buildings used for religious worship. The CBECS survey is conducted every

four years and the most recent survey

was completed for 2003

. The CBECS survey sample was designed so that survey responses could be used to estimate characteristics of the entire nationwide commercial building stock. The 2003 survey selected 6,955 potential case buildings for sampling. The sampling procedures resulted in 5,215 completed building interviews for a response rate of 82 percent. To make national estimates from the sample data, EIA calculated base sampling weights for each building (the reciprocal of the probability

of that building being selected into the sample). In other words, the base sampling weight is the number of national buildings represented b y the sampled building. The base weight was further adjusted to account for nonresponsive bias.

### 67

EIA publishes summary

tables from the survey , and posts " microdata " files on the EIA website. The CBECS microdata consist of the 5,215 sampled building records, which each correspond to a single sampled building. For each building, these files contain information such as the building size, climatic region, census region, ye ar constructed, types of energy used, and energy consumption and expenditures. These individual building microdata records are also the basis for the summary

tables published by

EIA. Emissions Methodology EPA used the CBECS microdata to estimate c ommercial building emissions and populations above emission thresholds. Each of the 5,215 microdata records corresponds to a single sampled building. EIA has made available 20 different data files of the microdata records which contain a wide range of in formation on characteristics and energy use for each building. EPA's analysis relied on guidance provided by EIA on how to use the data. As noted above, the CBECS sample was designed so that survey responses could be used to estimate characteristics of the entire commercial building stock nationwide. The table below provides examples from EIA on how to calculate national commercial building characteristics from the sample building data.
Table 63 EIA Website Examples To Find the National E stimate for: Do T his... And You Should G et... Total number of buildings Sum ADJWT8 (weight factor) 4,858,749.82 (or 4,859 thousand) Total number of office buildings Sum ADJWT8 for cases where PBA8 (building code) = " 02 " 823,805.47 (or 824 thousand) Total floor space Create a new variable (weighted square footage) by multiplying ADJWT8 by SQFT8 (floor space) for each case, then sum this new variable 71,657,900,522 (or 71,658 million ft2 ) Total floor space in buildings with air conditioning Sum the new weighted square footage variable (see above) for cases where COOL8 (air conditioning) = " 1 " 63,559,999,624 (or 63,560 million ft2 ) Total electricity consumption in KWh Create a new variable (weighted electricity consumption) by multiplying ADJWT8 by ELCNS8 (el ectricity consumption) for each case, then sum this new variable 1,043,175,710,751 (or 1,043 billion kWh)
Source: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cbecs/cbecs2 003/public_use_2003/cbecs_pudata2003.html

. 

### EIA calculated base sampling weights for each surveyed building (these are the reciprocal of the probability of that building being selected into the sample). Therefore, a building with a base weight of 1,000 represents itself and 999 similar but unsampled buildings in

### 68

the total building stock. The base weight is further adjusted to account for non

- response bias. The variable " ADJWT8 " in the data file is the final weight. The ADJWT8 weight factor is used as described in Table 63 to extrapolate the survey sample to a national scale for any value. In order to obtain a national value each sample building ' s value must be multiplied by the building ' s weight (ADJWT8). All of the weighted values are then summed. 2003 CO 2 

### Emissions EPA calculated the CO 2 

### emissions for each of the 5,215 buildings based on the annual natural gas and oil consumption reported for the building. For national emission estimates and counts of buildings with annual CO 2 

### emissions over any threshold, EPA multiplied the base weights b y the sample emission totals to determine the national estimate of buildings with emissions over the threshold. Potential to Emit EPA estimates that commercial buildings operate at 15 percent of capacity. EPA considered several sources in making the PTE factor determination:

● A report prepared by

En ergy and Environmental Analysis , Inc. for Oak Ridge National Laboratory

describ ing the industrial and commercial boiler population in the United States (EEA , 2005). The report estimated an average commercial boiler capacity factor of 16 percent

. ● Reports on cooking equipment energy use b y the Food Service Technology Center in California suggesting that the cooking equipment in food service establishments operate at about ten percent of a theoretical maximum capacity based on 8 , 760 hours per year (Pechan, et.al , 2008).

● A study

of Los Angeles dry

cleaners performed by

the Pollution Prevention Education and Research Center (PPERC) in 2004 which demonstrates that dry cleaners operate boilers at about 10 to 15 percent of maximum capacity over a normal year ( Pechan, et al. , 2008)

. New Buildings The CBECS data identifies the year the sampled buildings were constructed. We used the construction year informati on to identify the number of new buildings built each year in the 1990 to 2003 period. Counts of the average number of these buildings built per year were then made at the different emissions and PTE thresholds. Threshold Summary The count of buildings and emissions at the threshold levels for the entire sector are shown in the table below. Threshold results b y commercial building categories (e.g., offices, public assembly , schools) are provided in Appendix B
.

### 69 Table 64 CO 2 

### Threshold Summary -- Commerc ial Sector Stationary Fuel Combustion

CO 2 Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of N ew

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 Emissions Covered (Tg per y ear) 100 1,355,921 22,123 119.262 250 731,477 12,041 105.306 1,000 172,654 2,922 69 .885 5,000 18,167 196 29.384 10,000 5,660 96 17.765 25,000 1,161 7 8.790 50,000 600 3 6.003 100,000 51 2 1.012


### 3.11 Residential Buildings Data Sources EPA used residential fuel consumption data from EIA ' s Residential Energy Consumption Survey , and multi

- family building and unit data from U.S. Census (Census) survey s to estimate CO 2 

### emissions and PTE for fuel combustion at single and multi

- family residential properties. The RECS is a national area

-probability sample survey

that collects energy

- related data for o ccupied primary

housing units. The most recent 2005 survey collected data from 4,382 households in housing units statistically selected to represent the 111.1 million housing units in the United States. RECS data are tabulated for the f our Census regions, the nine Census divisions, and for the four most populous States

-- California, Florida, New York, and Texas. The RECS sample was designed so that survey responses could be used to estimate characteristics of the national stock of occupied housing units. In order to arrive at national estimates from the RECS sample, EPA calculated base sampling weights for each housing unit as the reciprocal of the probability of that building being selected into the sample. Therefore, a housing unit with a base weight of 10,000 represents itself and 9,999 similar, but not sampled housing units in the total stock of occupied residential housing units. The base weight is further adjusted to account for non

- response bias. Ratio adjustments were also u sed to ensure that the RECS weights add up to Census Current Population Survey estimates of the number of households. The RECS data are provided at the housing unit level, and not at the building level. EPA used additional data from the Census on multi

- family building population characteristics to estimate total property emissions and PTE for multi

- unit properties. Census data were from two

### 70

sources : the Property

Owner and Manager Survey (POM S , 1996) and the American Housing Survey (AHS, 2005).
3.11.1 Single

- Family Homes The RECS data was used directly to estimate CO 2 

### emissions from fossil fuel combustion at sing le

- family

housing units for space heating, water heating, and appliances. EPA assumed that each unit in an attached single

- famil y building was a separate source, with combustion equipment under different ownership. The annual energy

consumption by

fuel (1 , 000 Btus) for the surveyed unit was multiplied by the fuel CO 2 

### emission factor to estimate annual emissions. Total single

- family unit emissions for the entire country

were calculated by

multiplying CO 2 

### emissions for each units by the base sampling weight. Potential to Emit The PTE for a single

- family unit was calculated b y dividing the CO 2 

### emissions from the unit by a capacity

factor of 0.1. This factor was estimated by comparing the average annual CO 2 

### emissions per heated floor space area per hour b y climate zone, to required heat input capacity

. The required heat input capacity was based on rule of thumb heating s ys tem requirements for the different climate zones. The tab le below shows the average Btu/f t2



### - h our from the RECS data and Heating Requirement (Btu/ f t2 

### ) by climate zone. A heating s ys tem efficiency of 80 percent was used to estimate the required space heating capacity

. Table 65 Single - Fa mily Detached and Attached Households with Fossil Fuel- Fired Space Heating

(from RECS, 2005)

Households (millions) Climate

Zone(s) Heating Degree

Day Range Average Annual Fuel

Consumption (Btu/f t 2

- h our) S pace Heating

Requirement* (Btu/f t 2) 6.8 5 > 7,000 4.8 50

– 60 16.7 4 5,500

– 7,000 5.4 45

– 50 17.0 3 4,000

– 5,499 4.6 40

– 45 18.9 1 and 2 < 4,000 3.8 Zone 2: 35

– 40 Zone 1: 30

– 35

* Heating requirement ranges are from www.acdirect.com/systemsize.php

.

### 71

3.11.2 Multi

- F amily

Residential Buildings
Emission Rates As noted earlier in the Data Source section, the RECS data are on an individual unit basis, not building or property basis, so a different approach was required for multi

- family units where EPA assume d common ownership of the property fuel combustion equipment. In order to estimate property emissions and the number of properties above different emission and PTE thresholds , EPA combined the RECS data with data from the POM S and AHS. From the RECS data , EPA first calculated average residential unit CO 2 

### emissions for the two most common fuels (natural gas and oil) b y multi

- family category . These are shown in the table below.
Table 66

Multi - Fa mily Residentia l Unit -- Average Annual CO 2 

### Emissions

(from RECS, 2005) Multi - Family Category (number of units) Natural Gas Space Heating (t ons CO 2/residential unit-y ear) Fuel Oil Space Heating (t ons CO 2/r esidential unit-y ear) 2 to 4 units 4.8 8.3 5 or more units 3.0 8.9


### EPA also obtained annual CO 2 

### emission rates from an EPA anal ys is that was based on Lawrence Berkeley

National Lab (LBNL) modeling studies. Those rates were estimated f or old and new building units (s ee Table 67 ). The pre

- 1980 building estimate co mpares with the overall average from the RECS data. The post

- 1980 building estimates are much lower, particularl y for units burning fuel oil.
Table 67

Multi - Fa mily Residential Unit -- Average Annual CO 2 

### Emissions (from 2008 EPA Analysis based on LBNL , 1 997) Multi - Family Category (building age) Gas Serviced Units

(t ons CO 2/residential unit-y ear) Fuel Oil Serviced Units (t ons CO 2/residential unit-y ear) Pre
- 1980 building 4.75 7.17 Post
- 1980 building 2.65 3.87

### 72

Existing Property Characteristics In for mation on the distribution of multi

- family properties by

number of units per p roperty was taken from the 1995

– 1996 POMS. The data are aggregated b y different housing unit ranges. The table below shows the property size distribution from unpublished POM S data (NMHC Quick Facts

- - Apartment Stocks (http://www.nmhc.org) ) . The POM S data were f or privately owned housing only and excluded public housing projects (about 13,500 buildings and 1,326,000 units). For our estim ates, the building numbers were adjusted to current (2005) levels based on the RECS unit data (unit ratio of RECS to POM S ). EPA assumed the same unit distribution in the adjustment.
Table 68

Multi - Fa mily Residential Property Size Distribution (from National Multi - Housing Council tabulatio n of unpublished POMS data 1995

– 1996)

Number of Rental Units on Property Number of Properties (1995

– 1996) Number of Units (1995

– 1996) Average Number

of Units per Property 2 1,558,700 3,093,200 2 3 336,030 1, 025,900 3 4 341,350 1,436,800 4 5

– 9 281,500 1,897,700 7 10

– 14 70,390 862,280 12 15

– 19 36,780 602,260 16 20

– 29 38,000 916,750 24 30

– 39 18,166 604,240 33 40

– 49 14,431 702,790 49 50

– 99 26,694 2,009,400 75 100

– 199 19,804 2,952,300 149 200

– 299 7,775 1,948,400 251 300

– 399 2,966 1,058,800 357 400

– 499 1,307 605,130 463 500

– 749 723 431,360 597 Over 750 307 437,670 1 , 426 Total 2,754,923 20,584,980

### 73

The adjusted POM S size distribution and average number of units in each categ ory were combined with information from RECS on the percentage of units that use gas or oil for space heating. The gas and oil emission factors from the previous tables were applied to the average number of units in each property size category by fuel to estimate property annual CO 2 

### emissions. For our final estimates we used the LBNL based emission factors for post

- 1980 buildings, over the RECS based factor. We found that these lower emission factors resulted in total emissions more in line with the total based on all RECS units and residential sector estimates in the U.S. Greenhouse Gas Inventory
. The RECS

- based factors combined with the POM S property

distribution data resulted in a larger overestimate in overall category annual emissions. The lack of information on the building population over 50 units, and lack of information on the correlation between unit emissions and the building/property size are large sources of uncertainty in the estimates at thresholds above 1 , 000 tons. Potential to Emit PTE was estimated using the same ten percent capacity factor as used for the single family residential units New Properties The AHS data provided information on new construction used to estimate the number of new buildings and new units with natural g as space heating th at were constructed in the 1999

– 2005 period. To simplify the anal ys is, EPA ignored the limited use of fuel oil for space heating in new units. The AHS data provided separately the number of new buildings with gas space heating per year, and a size distribution for all new buildings per year. The AHS size distribution stopped at 50 and larger, and was slightl y different in other categories from the POM S data

. EPA adjusted the distribution based on the POM S distribution and then us ed the same emission and capacity factor approach as used for existing units.

### 74 Table 69 Am erican Housing Survey New Building Data
Building Size: Number of Units per Building Number of New

Buildings per Year (1999

– 2005 ) (thousands) Fraction of All

New Buildings per Year (1999

– 2005) NewGas Buildings

p er Year (1999

– 2005) (thousands) Number of New

Gas Buildings per Year 2 6.3 0.22

16.0 3 , 468 3

– 4 5.4 0.19 2 , 995 5

– 9 6.1 0.21 3 , 389 10

– 19 6.0 0.21 3 , 310 20

– 29 3.1 0.11 1 , 734 30

– 49 1.0 0.03 552 50 or more 1.0 0.03 552 Total 29.0 1.00 16.0 16,000

### 75

Threshold Summary
Table 70

CO 2 

### Threshold Summaries -- Residential Sectors

Threshold (tons per y ear) Number of

Existing Sources Number of New

Facilities Added p er Year CO 2 Emissions

Co vered (Tg per y ear) Multi- F amily Residential

100 610,500 11,300 54.285 250 137,000 6,400 42.192 1,000 51,200 1,100 32.399 5,000 7,800 120 14.934 10,000 1,400 20 4.933 25,000 160 3 1.392 50,000 20 0 0.006 100,000 0 0 0 Single - Family Residential

100 3,925,000 33,000 51.408 250 45,350 515 1.67 0 1,000 0 0 0 Total Residential Sector

100 4,535,500 44,300 105.693 250 182,350 6,915 43.862 1,000 51,200 1,100 32.399 5,000 7,800 120 14.934 100,00 1,400 20 4.933 25,000 160 3 1.392 50,000 20 0 0.00 6 100,000 0 0 0

### 76 References Brown, E., and Elliott, R.N., On

-Farm Energy Use Characterizations , Report Number IE052, ©American Council for an Energy

- Efficient Economy , Washington, D.C., March 2005. http://www.aceee.org/pubs/ie052full.pdf E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., Perrin Quarles Associates, Inc., and Alpine Geophy sics, LLC , Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions and New Source Review , Work Assignment No. 1

- 06, EPA Contract No. EP
- D
- 07
- 097, April 1 0, 2008 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0318
- 0080). Environmental Energy

and Analysis, Inc. (EEA), Characterization of the U.S. Industrial Commercial Boiler Population , submitted to Oak Ridge National Laboratory, May 2005 ( EPA
- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0318
- 0005 ). http://www1.eere.energy .gov/industry /distributedenergy

/pdfs/characterization_industrial_comme rical_boiler_population.pdf Energy and Env ironmental Anal ys is, Inc . (EEA), World of Distributed Generation in Delaware , February 2004
. http://www.eeainc.com/rrdb/DGRegProject/Documents/DEDGWorld.pdf Federal Register, 74 FR 16447 , Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Regulations ; Proposed Rule, Washington, D.C., April 10, 2009

. Federal Reserve, Statistical Release G17. Industrial Production and Capacity Utilization

. http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/g17/About.htm IC F, International, Memorandum from Chris Steuer, Marian Van Pelt and Robert Lanza regarding Methodology

Description for Industrial Sector GHG Threshold Analysis, November 2, 2007 (E PA
- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0318
- 0079). Lawrence Berkeley

National Laboratory

(LBNL). Energy Data Sourcebook for the U.S. Residential Sector

. Prepared b y Energy Analysis Program, Environmental Energy Technologies Division, LBNL, University of Cali fornia, Berkeley , C A, September 1997. http://enduse.lbl.gov/info/Pubs95_99.html National Multi

- Housing Council (NMHC), Quick Facts Apartment Stock: Distribution of Apartments by Size of Property , NMHC tabulation o f unpublished data from the U.S. Census Bureau 's 1995

– 1996 Property Owners and Managers Survey

. http://www.nmhc.org/ U.S. Census Bureau (2 006), American Housing Survey for the United States: 2005
. http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing.html

. U.S. Census Bureau (2004), 2002 Economic Census, August 2004. http://www.census.gov/econ/census02/

### 77

U.S. Cen sus Bureau (1998), 1995 Property Owners and Managers Survey , 1998. http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/poms/poms.html U.S. Energy

Information Administration (EIA), Electric Power A nnual , 2007, January 21, 2009. http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/ epa/epa_sum.html U.S. Energy

Information Administration (EIA), Annual Energy Review 2005 , DOE/EIA

- 0384, July 1, 2006. U.S. Energy

Information Administration (EIA), 2005 Residential Energy Consumption Survey , February 2009. http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/recs/recspubuse05/pubuse05.htm l U.S. Energy

Information Administration (EIA), 2003 Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey , December 2006. http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cbecs/cbecs 2003/public_use_2003/cbecs_pudata2003.html U.S. Energy

Information Administration (EIA), 2002 Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey , January

2007. http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mecs/contents .html U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990

– 2007, April 2009, US EPA 430

- R
- 09
- 004. http://www.epa.gov/ climatechange/emissions/usinventory report.html U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Supporting Data f or Threshold Analysis Subpart E

– W, Greenhouse Gas Mandatory Reporting Rulemaking, March 10, 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
2008
- 0508
- 0046.7). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA ), Supporting Data f

or Threshold Analysis Subpart X

– PP, Greenhouse Gas Mandatory Reporting Rulemaking, March 10, 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
2008
- 0508
- 0046.8). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Emissions &Generation Resource In tegrated Database (eGRID) 2004 , May 2007. http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy /energy

- resources/egrid/index.html U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Regulatory Impact An alysis for the Stationary Spark

-Ignition New Source Performance Standard (SI NSPS) and New Area Source NESHAP , December 2007, US EPA 452/R

- 07
- 015
. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/nsps/sinsps /sinspspg.html U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Draft U.S. Adipic Acid and Nitric Acid N 2 

### O Emissions 1990

– 2020: Inventories, Projections and Opportunities for Reductions , November 2001. http://www.epa.gov/nitrousoxide/pdfs/adipic_nitric_n2o.pdf

### 78

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Climate Change Division, Fugitive Emissions Reporting from the Petroleum and Natural Gas Industry: Background Technical Support Document, undated, FR publish date: March 26, 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0023). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Air and Radiation, Technical Support Document for the A dipic Acid Production Sector: Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases, January 22, 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0005). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Air and Radiation, T echnical Support Document for Process Emissions from Primary Production of Aluminum: Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases, February 4, 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0006). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Air and Radiation, Technical Support Document for the Ammonia Production Sector: Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases, January 22, 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0007). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Air and Radiation, Technical Support Document for Process Emissions from Cement: Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases, January 28, 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0008). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Air and Radiation, Technical Support Document for Process Emissions From Electronics Manufacture (Semiconductors, MEMs, Liquid Crystal Displays, and Photovoltaics), January 29, 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0009). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Air and Radiation, Technical Support Document for Ethanol Facilities: Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases, February 4, 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0010). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Air and Radiation, Technical Support Document for the Ferroalloy Production Sector : Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases, January 22, 2009 (E PA
- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0011). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Air and Radiation, Technical Support Document for the Glass Manufacturing Sector : Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases, January 22, 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 200 8
- 0508
- 0014). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Air and Radiation, T echnical Support Document for Emissions of HFC

- 23 from Production of HCFC

- 22: Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases, February 06, 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0015). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Air and Radiation, Technical Support Document for the Hydrogen Production : Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases, August 5, 2008 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0016).

### 79

U.S . Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Air and Radiation, Technical Support Document for the Iron and Steel Sector : Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases, September 9, 2008 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0017). U.S. Environmental P rotection Agency (EPA), Office of Air and Radiation, Technical Support Document for the Lead Production Sector : Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases, January 22, 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0018). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Air and Radiation, Technical Support Document for the Lime Manufacturing Sector : Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases, January 22, 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0019). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Air and Radiation, Technical Support Document for Process Emissions from Magnesium Production and Processing: Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases , February 10 , 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0020). U.S. Environmental Protection Agenc y (EPA), Office of Air and Radiation, Technical Support Document for the Petrochemical Production Sector : Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases, September 9, 2008 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0024). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) , Office of Air and Radiation, Technical Support Document for the Petroleum Refining Sector : Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases, September 9, 2008 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0025). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of A ir and Radiation, Technical Support Document for the Phosphoric Acid Production Sector : Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases, February 20, 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0026). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Air and Radiation, Technical Support Document for the Pulp and Paper Sector : Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases, February 11, 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0027). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Air and Radiation, Tech nical Support Document for the Silicon Carbide Production Sector : Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases, January 22, 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0028). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Air and Radiation, Technical Support Document for the Soda Ash Manufacturing Sector : Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases, January 22, 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0029). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Air and Radiation, Technical Support Do cument for the Titanium Dioxide Production Sector : Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases, January 22, 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0031).

### 80

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Air and Radiation, Technical Support Documen t for Underground Coal Mines: Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases, February 4, 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0032). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Air and Radiation, Technical Support Document for the Zinc Produc tion Sector : Proposed Rule for Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases, January 22, 2009 (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2008
- 0508
- 0033).

### 81 Appendix A Sector Permit Threshold Counts and Emissions by GHG The listed electronic spreadsheet files contain the permit threshol d counts and emissions for each sector and subsector by GHG. These listed files are included in separate files in the docket (EPA

- HQ
- OAR
- 2009
- 0517). Please refer to the following file names for additional information on specific sectors and GHGs:

● GHG Data for Final Tailoring Rule Development

- CO2e .xls

● GHG Data for Final Tailoring Rule Development

- CO2 .xls

● GHG Data for Final Tailoring Rule Development

- CH4 .xls

● GHG Data for Final Tailoring Rule Development

- N2O .xls

● GHG Data for Final Tail oring Rule Development

- HFC .xls

● GHG Data for Final Tailoring Rule Development

- PFC .xls

● GHG Data for Final Tailoring Rule Development

- SF6 .xls

### 82 Appendix B Commercial Building Sector - - Permit Threshold Results by Commercial Category
Please refer to the electronic file " Commercial Building Category CO 2 

### Permit Threshold Results.xls

. " in the docket for EPA
- HQ
- OAR
- 2009
- 0517

### 1 

# Attachment C Summary of Methodology and Data Used to Estimate Burden Relief and Evaluate Resource Requirements at Alternative Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Permitting Thresholds

March 2010
1. Introduction This paper summarizes an assessment of the estimated resource requirements for permitting authorities to include GHG at several possible major source permitting thresholds and the burden reduction and costs savings for permitting authorities and sources as a result of requiring the inclusion of GHG in the title V and Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permitting programs at thresholds greater than the current statutory requirements. A preliminary anal ys is to support the tailoring rule proposal resulted in an earlier version of this Technical Support Document, found at EPA

- HA
- OAR
- 2009
- 0517. 14 

### Based on comments received on the proposal and updates to key assumptions, this revi sed summary presents the updated methodology

and burden reduction estimates resulting from several permitting threshold alternatives considered for the final tailoring rule. The anal ys is was performed considering GHG emissions on a carbon dioxide equivalent (CO 2 

### e) basis, which represents the sum of the six primary GHG with their respective global warming potentials (GWP) applied. Time and costs associated with permit activities are derived from existing Information Collection Requests (I CRs) for the title V and PSD programs. Estimates for the number of affected sources used in

14 “ Summary of ICR

-based Data Used to Estimate Avoided Burden and Evaluate Resource Requirements at Alternative GHG Permitting Thresholds;” Prepared by EPA Staff; August 2009.

### 2

this analysis were obtained from the GHG thresholds evaluation, which can be found at EPA

HQ
- OAR
- 2009
- 0517. 15 

### 2. Methodology for Estimating Permitting Burden Due to GHG Emission Source s
This section describes the basic methodology we used to estimate the different ty pes and quantities of permitting actions that would be affected b y addressing GHGs under the PSD and title V permitting programs. The final burden results summarized in Se ction 3 are based on the methodologies described in this section. Indeveloping our methodology , we established different applicability

options under which GHG emission sources would be regulated. These GHG applicability thresholds range from the statutory threshold levels (100 and 250 tpy) to different combinations of major source and significance levels based on GHG emissions, and finally , applicability

based on GHG

- related additions to otherwise occurring permitting actions for non

- GHGs (also referred to here and in the preamble for this action as the ‘any way ’ source approach). We considered several different major source/major modification threshold combinations. We chose the combinations to reflect representative, incremental steps along the possible range. Because it is time

- and resource

- intensive to develop estimates for a given step, we chose intervals that best reflect representative points within the range given those time and resource constraints. For example, as it became evident from the analysis that the 100,000 tpy CO 2 

### e major source threshold would be a viable option under one of the phase

- in steps in the GHG tailoring rule, we needed to then evaluate different GHG significance level options in combination with the 100,000 tpy CO 2 

### major source level to determine the ultimate impact on PSD and title V permitting activity

.

15 “T echnical Support Document for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Thresholds Evaluation;” Office of Air Quality Policy and Standards; March 29, 2010.

### 3

PSD Permits Table 2

- 1 summarizes EPA’s estimate of modifications and new construction PSD permitting actions potentially affected by

the addition of GHG as a regulated air pollutant at different GHG threshold options for PSD applicability . These actions are broken down by ty pe of modification and new construction activity

. Three types of modifications are included in this anal ys is: major modifications at major sources that are triggered b y increased conventional pollutant emissions, but also exceed the significance level for GHG; modifications previously considered minor that become major modifications due to GHG emissions occurring at existing major sources ; and modificatio ns at newl y major GHG sources due solel y to emissions exceeding the significance level threshold for GHG . For new construction, two ty pes of sources are listed

– those that are major sources due solely to the emissions of GHG, and those which are classifie d as major due to conventional pollutant emissions, but also exceed the GHG significance level (or ‘any way ’ sources). The first line items in Table 2

- 1 for modifications and new construction present estimates of GHG

- related permitting actions that would o ccur at ‘anyw ay ’ sources ; these are labeled in the table as “Current Modifications

– Add Additional GHG” and “Newly Constructed Major Sources

– Add Additional GHG.” The August 2008 I CR for the New Source Review (NSR) program estimates that 282 PSD and 519 non - attainment NSR permits are issued annually

. 16 

### EPA’s initial burden anal ys is concentrated solely on the 282 annual PSD actions. If a source is major for a pollutant for which an area is designated non

- attainment, all significant emissions or significant emissions increases of pollutants for which the area is in attainment are still subject to

16 Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Non

- Attainment Area New Source Review (Renewal), EPA ICR Number 123.23, OMB Control Number 2060

- 0003, 2008. A copy of this document is available in the docket for the final Tailoring Rule.

### 4 Table 2 - 1. Estimated Number of PSD Permit Actions Exceeding GHG 17 Threshold Options

Threshold 100/250 tpy major; 100/250 tpy sig. level 25,000

tpy major; 25,000 tpy sig. level 50,000

tpy major; 50,000 tpy sig. level 100,000 tpy

major; 50,000 tpy sig. level 100,000 tpy

major; 75,000 tpy sig. level 100,000 tpy

major; 100,000 tpy sig. level Non GHG Current Modifications

– Add Additional GHG 448 448 448 448 448 448 4 48 Minor Modifications Becoming Newly Major 17,894 8,947 1,789 1,789 895 0 0 Modifications at Newly Major Sources 43,942 250 117 20 20 20 0 Modifications Total 62,284 9,645 2,354 2,257 1,363 468 448 Newly Constructed Major Sources
- Add Additional GHG 240 240 240 240 240 240 240 Newly Constructed Major Sources 19,649 10 3 2 2 2 0 Newly Constructed Sources Total 19,889 250 243 242 242 242 240 Total 82,173 9,895 2,597 2,499 1,605 710 688

17 GHG threshold options are all based on tpy CO 2 e. The Non

- GHG option is based on a PSD action being triggered for a non

- GHG, conventional pollutant (e.g., nitric oxides), where a GHG
- related PSD review is only necessary when associated GHG emissions for the project exceed 75,000 tpy CO 2 e.

### 5

PSD review. Thus, some of the facilities applying for nonattainment permits may also undergo PSD actions at the same time. Although there is no way of accuratel y predicting which of the 519 nonattainment actions might also coincide with a PSD action related to GHG emissions, we believe it is likely

that most will sin ce they typically involve large emission sources; thus, it is assumed all nonattainment actions from the ICR annual estimate will also need a PSD permit. Therefore, in this final analysis, to more accuratel y depict the number of PSD permitting actions
occurring annuall y, it is assumed that all 801 permitting actions above involve a PSD action. We estimate that 70% of these permit actions are modifications, or 560 of the 801, based on feedback received from the National Association of Clean Air Agencies (whi ch estimated that some 65% of these permitting actions involve modifications); other commenters on the proposed tailoring rule (who generall y said that most permitting actions involve modifications); and EPA program staff experience. 18 

### Further, 80% of these modifications are expected to involve combustion activities with GHG emission levels exceeding the statutory thresholds and any

of the significance levels we considered, up to an including the 100,000 tp y CO 2 

### e level , thus requiring the inclusion of GHG re lated requirements in a PSD permit. 19 

### This equates to 448 modifications annually

. We believe that any of the modifications that would be subject to PSD due to the conventional emissions would also be large enough to increase GHGs b y at least 100,000 tpy of CO 2 

### e.

18 “NACAA Summary on Permitting GHGs Under the Clean Air Act”; Memorandum from Mary Stewart Douglas, National Association of Clean Air Agencies to Juan Santiago, EPA/OAQPS, September 3, 2009. 19 The 80% estimate was obtained by reviewing a sample of PSD modification permits to determine the num ber involving combustion that would emit GHGs. This revie w showed that approximately 80% of PSD permitting actions involve combustion units of all types. These permitting actions are being permitted for, or taking limits for, NOx or some other combustion

- related emission. These run the gamut of industrial activity, from power generators to manufacturing facilities, and many other types.

### 6

The 240 remaining annual permit actions

—labeled in Table 2

- 1 as “Newl y Constructed Major Source

- Add Additional GHG”

—are assumed to be construction of new major sources as determined b y emissions of one or more NAAQS pollutants. Due to the size and emissions of sources currentl y subject to the PSD permitting program, it is believed all of these newl y constructed major sources will exceed each of the GHG threshold s we considered, including the 100,000 tpy

CO 2 

### e, and will also need to include GHG

- related requirements in the PSD permit. In total, all 688 major permitting actions mentioned above will need to factor in GHG requirements as indicated in Table 2

- 1. For permitting authorities, 50 additional burden hours are estimated to include the GHG requirements in a p ermit. 20 

### For affected sources, approximately 222 additional burden hours are needed , based on the two line items in the current NSR I CR we expect to be impacted b y the addition of GHG

– approximately 120 hours to “obtain guidance on data needs”
an d 102 hours for the “preparation of BACT anal ysis.” That is, the current NSR I CR indicates that on average, affected sources spend 222 hours for these two activities for their conventional pollutants. We expect that they will need to spend an equal amount of time for these two activities for their GHG emissions. The sources will need to “obtain guidance on data needs” because they

will be analyzing their emissions from GHG units and will need to prepare a separate BACT anal ys is for their GHG emissions, or e lse expand the BACT anal ys is they would otherwise do for their conventional pollutants to account for their GHG emissions. We believe

20 A well

- known gas with a familiar BACT process, such as NOx, requires an average of 20

- 30 burden hours to be included in a permit. As less is known regarding GHGs and the BACT decision process, expert staff judgment set the burden for permitting authorities to add GHG to permits at 50 hours. This is because determining BACT entails review and analysis of the available c ontrol techniques. For a well

- known pollutant, the experience of the permitting authority allows it to efficiently consider the various options and narrow them down promptly to the one that should be considered BACT. Because no BACT determinations have e ver been made, permitting authorities will need to invest additional time into reviewing the available technologies and selecting which one should be considered the best for the particular source. In the absence of any previous experience selecting BACT f or GHG sources, we estimate that twice as much time will be necessary as for conventional pollutants.

### 7

that the remaining activities that the affected sources must undertake would not be appreciabl y lengthened b y their need to include GHG emissions. According to the NSR ICR, approximately 74,591 minor permitting actions occur annually , including the following: 30% involve new minor sources, new sy nthetic minor sources, and sy nthetic

-based modifications ; 30% involve true minor modifications; 20% involve netting

based minor modifications ; and 20% involve minor/administrative permit revisions

. 21 

### We believe that a number of projects that could have taken limits or netted out of PSD review and thereby obtain a minor permit will now be required to apply for a major PSD permit, depending on the significance threshold set for GHG. These projects are identified in Table 2

- 1 under “Minor Modifications Becoming Newl y Major.” Combining the number of s ynthetic

- based modifications (7,459) and netting

- based modifications (14,909) identified in the I CR, approximately

22,368 of these actions could potentially become major modifications subject to PSD review if their associated GHG emissions increases exceed the selected GHG significance level option

. We did not count ‘new minor sources’ and ‘new sy nthetic minors’ because we have already accounted for them as potential major GHG sources if their PTE emissions exceed the selected GHG major source threshold option. Based on staff review of samples o f minor source permits, it is estimated that 80% of the current minor modification actions likely involve combustion sources

– totaling 17,894 actions of the total 22,368 minor modification actions. 22 

### Some of these actions may trigger the requirements of th e PSD program depending on their GHG emission increases and the selected GHG significance threshold. Inthe absence of any experience involving GHG sources and any sufficient quantitative data from commenters, we determined the number of these actions on the

21 See NSR ICR at page 11. 22 See footnote 6, above (basis for 80% calculation).

### 8

following basis: We assumed the following percentage of the total 17,984 actions would move to a major modification status due to GHG increases for each of the GHG significance level options considered in this analysis: 50% at 25,000 tpy CO 2 

### e; 10% at 50,000 tpy CO 2 

### e; 5% at 75,000 tpy

CO 2 

### e; and zero at 100,000 tpy CO 2 

### e. To determine these percentages, we considered the relative emissions of CO 2 

### emissions to NOx emissions at the current major modification significance level threshold for NOx (40 tpy). For example, for an average natural gas combustion boiler (a common industrial combustion unit that is part of many modification projects), a 40 tp y NOx emissions would coincide with a 56,000 tpy CO 2 

### e level. Since many combustion related projects keep j ust under the 40 tpy NOx level to avoid major modification status, we assume that the CO 2 

### e emissions for a similar project will be around the 50,000 tpy CO 2 

### e level. Based on the relationship in combustion

- related emission levels between NOx and CO 2 

### e just described, we believe it is reasonable to expect that all these currently minor modification projects involving combustion units will exceed the 100 tpy GHG significance level under the baseline scenario. This is because we do not believe that the sources at which these projects occur will be able to structure their operations so as to limit their GHG emissions to less than 100 tpy

GHGs. However, at higher GHG significance level options, we assume that a decreasing proportion of projects will be significantly large enough, or they

may emit GHGs close enough to the GHG significance level to be able to limit their operations or net

- out for GHGs like they

can for NOx. In the absence of experience and quantitative information from commenters we made the follo wing assumptions regarding how many of these formerl y minor modification projects would be subject to major PSD review at the different GHG significance level options: at the 25,000 tpy CO 2 

### e significance level, we estimate that half of the modifications w ill be able to limit their operations to avoid PSD ; at the 50,000 tpy CO 2 

### e

### 9

significance level, we estimate that 10% of these previously minor now major modifications will be covered b y PSD; at the 75,000 tpy CO 2 

### e significance level we estimate that only 5% of these currentl y minor modification projects move into a major modification status for GHGs; and lastly , at the 100,000 tp y CO 2 

### e significance level, we assume that none of these projects will be large enough b y themselves to trigger major PSD review. In addition to sources becoming subject to PSD requirements because of GHG emissions related to modifications, new construction will occur that will require a PSD permit solely due to the source’s potential GHG emission levels, identified in Table 2

- 1 a s “Newly Constructed Major Sources.” Based on the source data obtained from the GHG thresholds evaluation, these newly constructed major sources involve both industrial and commercial/residential facilities

. 23 

### The current NSR I CR notes that permitting autho rities spend approximately 300 hours processing and issuing a new construction industrial source PSD permit. Sources spend almost 870 hours on average preparing for the same permit. In the previous burden anal ys is, commercial/residential permits were assum ed to require onl y 20% of the time necessary for an industrial permit. While it is still believed that these sources are less complex than their industrial counterparts in terms of numbers and types of emissions sources and control requirements, EPA
now es timates the commercial/residential permits to take 70% of the time required to complete an industrial permit , resulting in approximately 210 hours and 866 hours for permitting authorities and sources respectively

. 24 

### This is based on comments received , which stated that we had significantly

underestimated the amount of time needed. These commenters emphasized that commercial and residential sources will generall y be located in populated areas, and therefore

23 “T echnical Suppo rt Document for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Thresholds Evaluation;” Office of Air Quality Policy and Standards; March 29, 2010. 24 See Tables 2

- 2 and 2

- 3.

### 10

may elicit significant amounts of public input, whi ch in turn will increase the amount of time needed compared to our initial estimates. However, the commenters generally did not provide quantitative information. As a result, we conducted further evaluation of the additional support and outreach activities for permitting authorities to assist with applicability determinations and emissions calculations , as virtually all commercial/residential sources will have no experience with the PSD permitting process. There are also many permit preparation activitie s that represent a fixed cost, such as preparation of notices and public hearings. Of the sources falling in this category , the number requiring PSD permitting will vary depending on where the thresholds for triggering PSD review (both major source and modifications thresholds) are established

.

Table 2 - 2. Average Permitting Authority Burden per GHG PSD Permit Type

Activity Burden Hours per Permit - Industrial Burden Hours

per Permit - Commercial/ Residential a Attend Preapplication Meetings 36 27 Ans wer Respondent Questions 20 15 Log In and Review Data Submissions 16 12 Request Additional Information 8 6 Analyze for and Provide Confidentiality Protection 24 2 Prepare Completed Applications for Processing 38 29 File and Transmit Copies 8 6 Prepare Preliminary Determination 36 27 Prepare Notices for and Attend Public Hearings 40 30 Application Approval 48 36 Notification of Applicant of PA Determination 8 6 Submittal of Information on BACT/LAER to RBLC 19 14 Total Burden H ours per Permit 301 210

a Ingeneral, to process commercial/residential permits, permitting authorities will have to spend 75% of the amount of time they spend on industrial permits, except they will have to spend even less time on confidentiality due to the fact that most residential sources are not likely to be concerned about confidentiality. Commercial/residential permits will be much simpler than industrial permits, but a large part of the permitting costs are fixed costs. For example, organizing and holding a hearing for a much simpler permit, compared to a more complex permit, nevertheless take almost as long because of the document preparation, travel, and organizational details.

### 11

Table 2 - 3. Average Source Burden per GHG PSD Permit Type

Activ ity Burden Hours per Permit - Industrial Burden Hours per

Permit - Commercial/ Residential a Preparation and Planning Determination of Compliance Requirements 170 170 Obtain Guidance on Data Needs 120 120 Preparation of BACT Analysis 102 102 Data Collection and Analysis Air Quality Modeling 200 40 Determination of Impact on Air Quality Related Values 100 30 Post
- construction Air Quality Monitoring 50 20 Permit Application Preparation and Submittal of Permit Application 60 60 Public Hearings 24 24 Revisions to Permit 40 40 Total Burden 866 606

aPSD permit applications for commercial/residential sources will be significantly simpler than industrial source PSD permit applications. However, due to their inexperience, we estimate commercial/residential sources will take as long to complete their steps for their permit application as it will for industrial sources to complete their steps. Commercial/residential sources will, on average, have much less work for data collection and analysis. We estimate that they will have approximately 25% as much work in these areas (90 hours) compared to industrial sources (350 hours). However, commercial/residential sources will have to spend some time on data collection analysis is because some o f them will have conventional pollutants that they emit in amounts that exceed the “significance” levels, but not the “major” levels, and they will have to analyze those conventional pollutants. Our 25% estimate is based, in the absence of actual experien ce or quantitative data from commenters, on our judgment that significantly less than 50% of commercial/residential sources emit conventional pollutants in amounts that equal or exceed the significance levels, but those that do may have to spend more time than industrial sources on data collection because they are unfamiliar with the tasks and therefore will face a learning curve. 

### Finally , an existing, but newly classified major source for GHG, may undergo a modification for which it will then be subject to PSD permitting requirements. This category of PSD permitting activity

is listed on Table 2

- 1 as “Modifications at Newl y Major Sources.” With this new major source status, these facilities must apply for and be issued a PSD permit, if they undergo a majo r modification. See Appendix A for a list of newl y major sources at different major source GHG thresholds. We estimate that 4% of these newl y major sources will undergo modifications. This rate was obtained b y dividing the current 560 annual PSD modifi cation

-

### 12

related permit actions (i.e., 70% of 801 actions identified in the NSR I CR) by the existing major source population of 14,700 major source title V permits. This represents our best available estimate of the rate of PSD modification activity at major sources, and we make the assumption that this rate will also apply for newl y major GHG sources. We recognize that there is some level of uncertainty in applying this rate to GHG

- only sources, particularl y for sources in unconventional sectors such as commercial and residential categories, however we believe at higher GHG threshold levels, where large industrial sources predominate, that this modification rate provides a reasonable estimate of modification activity

. As no data are yet available for
commerc ial/residential sources and because we cannot conclude that they will differ from industrial sources, we select the same 4% rate for modification activity

.

Title V Permits Title V programs also complete several ty pes of permitting actions annually , including processing and issuing new permits, permit revisions, and permit renewals. Newl y constructed major sources or sources designated newl y major due to a modification are required to apply for and be issued a title V permit in order to operate. In additio n to sources new to title V, permitting authorities must add GHG terms to permits for sources exceeding the threshold set for GHG emissions. Permitting authorities may face burdens to update existing title V permits for GHG under two possible scenarios: (1 ) EPA promulgates or approves any applicable requirements for GHGs that would apply to such a source, which would generall y require a permit reopening or renewal application, or (2) the source makes a change that would result in an applicable requirement f or GHG to newly apply to the source, such as PSD review, which would generally require an

### 13

application for a permit revision. Permitting authorities will also need to process permit renewal applications, generall y on a five

- ye ar cycle, and such renewals wo uld need to assure that the permit properly addresses GHG. The April 2007 Title V ICR estimates that 50 permits are completed every year for new
sources. 25 

### For this anal ys is, it is assumed that all 50 of these typicall y large industrial

- ty pe
sources will be capable of potentially emitting GHG and will need to add GHG

- related requirements to the permit. The estimated burden per title V permit in the ICR represents an average of multiple pollutants; we estimate the addition of GHGs will add an additional 10% of the time currentl y estimated for a new title V permit. We believe that 10% is the appropriate amount because for the most part, these sources will simply need to add information concerning inventory , reporting, or monitoring of their GHG emissions, as appropriate, which they can readil y do. The I CR also identifies 3,267 permit renewals conducted on an annual basis. As not all sources potentiall y emit GHG above a determined threshold, this analysis examines the estimated 80% involving combustion activi ties that most likely have the potential to emit GHG above the series of potential thresholds evaluated. 26 

### Therefore, approximately 2,614 sources will need to address GHG in the new version of the permit. Revisions to title V permits will also be necessary based on the number of modifications calculated for this anal ys is. Revisions occurring specificall y due to GHG may involve significant revisions, minor revisions, or administrative actions to operating permits. EPA estimates that this

25 Information Collection Request for State Operating Permit Regulations (Renewal), EPA ICR Number 1587.07 , OMB Control Number 2060

- 0243, 2007. A copy of this document is available in the docket for the final Tailoring Rule. 26 The 80% estimate was obtained through a review of existing title V permit source categorization.

### 14

activity will require 40 hours per permit on average for permitting authorities to complete. 27 

### The number of operating permit revisions will vary based on the number of previously minor modifications now qualifying as major modifications, and modifications at newly major source s, both listed in Table 2

- 1. At any level, it is assumed that the 448 modifications involving combustion that occur annually will need to include any

GHG requirements in the revision of their respective title V permits. EPA estimates that permitting autho rities will spend, in addition to the current burden to issue a title V permit revision, an additional 10% of the 40 hours needed to complete this process, or four hours per action. Finally , new industrial and commercial/residential sources will be enterin g title V permitting programs annually due solel y to their GHG emissions. These commercial/residential sources that exceed the major source threshold solely due to their GHG emissions will not likely have substantial applicable requirements in the near term and /or will not require as much time to process as those for industrial sources , which have other applicable requirements in addition to those related to their GHG emissions

. However, upon further evaluation and in response to comments from permitting authorities, EPA believes its initial estimate of one

- tenth of the burden hours required was considered too low. Permitting authorities would confront substantial challenges as they

have little experience with such sources and their GHG emissions. Commerci al/residential sources themselves will have no experience with the title V permitting process, which will increase the time needed to assess GHG emissions, complete the application, and respond to permitting authority comments. We also expect that in many cases the draft permits will undergo high levels of public participation through public comment periods, public

27 The Title V ICR indicates the burd ens associated with revisions are as follows: 90 hours for a significant revision, 30 hours for a minor revision, and 5 hours for an administrative action. See T able 8 at 23 . It is not known which revision will be required for any modification that exceeds the GHG significance level threshold; therefore, EPA averages the three permitting burdens to obtain a value of 40 hours per permit.

### 15

hearings, and petitions for reconsideration. Therefore, EPA assumes preparing a permit for affected commercial/residential sources will take 50% of the time a permitting authority currentl y spends on issuing a title V permit for an industrial source

.

Table 2 - 4. Average Permitting Authority Burden per GHG Title V Permit

Activity Burden Hours per Permit - Industrial Burden Hours

per Permit - Comme rcial/ Residential a Permit Application Review 100 33 Draft Permits Preparation 150 50 Comment Period Notification 10 10 Hold Public Hearings 100 90 Interaction with EPA 20 5 Analyze Public Comments 40 20 Permits Issuance 8 6 Total Burden 428 214

a Commercial/residential permits will be simpler, so that it would take the permitting authority about 1/3 of the time to review the permit application and draft the permit than it would for an industrial source permit. The comment period notification and time for public hearings, however, would be about the same because of the fixed time burdens necessary to provide notice and hold hearings. The amount of time interacting with EPA would be much less because of the relative simplicity of the permits. Analyzing public comments would take half as long as for an industrial permit because although the permits are much simpler, there could be a fair amount of public interest because of the location of the source. Permit issuance would take a less time than for an industrial source because most of the costs are fixed, although the permit is simpler.

Table 2 - 5 . Average Source Burden per GHG Title V Permit

Activity Burden Hours per Permit - Industrial Burden Hours

per Permit - Commercial/ Residential a Prepare Application 300 150 Draft Permits Interaction 40 20 Public Hearing Participation 10 10 Total Burden 350 180

a Commercial/residential permit applications will be significantly simpler than industrial source title V permit applications. However, due to th eir inexperience, we estimate commercial/residential sources will take half as long to complete their steps for their permit application as it will for industrial sources to complete their steps. Less interaction, again 50% less time, will be needed with p ermitting authorities during the permit drafting process. However, public hearing participation will likely require the same amount of time because of the fixed time burdens necessary to complete hearings.

### 16

Uncertainties in Estimates of Affected Sources In order to estimate the number of facilities that exceed a given GHG threshold (such as a 100 or 250 tpy

CO 2 

### e emission threshold for baseline anal ys is) , it is necessary to have emissions inventory data at the facility

or building level, including , and particularl y for lower threshold scenarios, numerous small sources in the residential and commercial sectors (e.g., apartment buildings and office buildings). Historically , however, EPA has not collected sector - wide, facility

- level information for GHG emiss ions under the CAA (with the exception of information from electric generating units required to report CO 2 

### emissions under the Acid Rain Program reporting requirements). To date, national EPA inventories of GHG sources have primaril y focused on ‘top

- down ’ estimates of GHG emissions from sectors and sources, and not facility

level estimates

. As a result, many of the uncertainties described here result from the absence of a comprehensive data set of facility- level GHG emissions across all sectors. A full description of the methodology

used for determining facility level emissions is provided in our GHG thresholds evaluation study , which can be found at EPA
- HQ
- OAR
- 2009
- 0517. 28 

### For residential, commercial, and smaller manufacturing operations, our current anal ys is relies on sample facility

datasets and ‘top

- down’ sector data (e.g., national fuel consumption statistics and/or building characteristics). There are inherent uncertainties in developing source counts from the allocation of these nationall y aggre gated statistics

. The allocation factors we used, based on U.S. Energy Information Administration statistical sampling procedures and energy consumption statistics , are likel y the best available to estimate the population of residential , commercial , and s mall manufacturing sources exceeding different GHG thresholds.

28 “T echnical Support Document for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Thresholds Evaluation;” Office of Air Quality Policy and Standards; March 29, 2010.

### 17

However, uncertainties may result in either overestimating or underestimating GHG emissions for a given individual facility

. It is worth noting that our estimates for the largest GHG emitting sources, such as electric utilities and refineries, are derived from bottom

- up calculations of individual facility

/building emissions so that there is increased certainty in evaluating and comparing the facility

counts at the higher GHG threshold scenari os where residential and commercial sources are not highly affected. Although there are different levels of uncertainty in our facility level estimates across sectors, we do believe that the data are sufficientl y robust to use in the aggregate to assess n ational permitting level impacts. EPA’s estimate of affected sources is based on their potential to emit (PTE) emissions, as opposed to actual emission levels. PTE is defined as the maximum capacity of a stationary source to emit a pollutant under its physical and operational design, including certain legal limitations, for example, on emissions or hours of operation. NSR and Title V programs both use PTE for defining and identifying major sources. Although we have attempted to identify reasonable adj ustments to account for PTE in our methodology , there are significant uncertainties in our PTE

- based estimates, particularly for the commercial, residential and small manufacturing sectors that have not traditionall y been subject to any form of air permitting. In practice, for example, for the residential sector and for many of the facilities in the commercial sector, where CO 2 

### emissions are primarily due to space heating/appliance usage, the combustion units are not likely

to be used constantly

at their maximum rated capacity because heating is not needed ye ar - round and heating s ys tems have thermostats. However, for our anal ys is we do assume full PTE

-based estimates for the residential and commercial sectors, using PTE adjustment factors of 10 and 6.6, respectivel y to adjust actual emissions to PTE level. Absent industry specific data, for small manufacturing source categories we assume a PTE adjustment

### 1 8

factor of 2; individual manufacturing facilities may operate their combustion equipment at levels abov e and below this capacity utilization rate, but we believe this PTE adjustment reflects a reasonable average rate across the variety of small manufacturing facilities included in the threshold anal ys is. Ultimately , the number of sources brought into either the NSR or Title V programs due solel y to their PTE would depend on how EPA interprets PTE for various types of emitting equipment (e.g., space

- heating furnaces in residential and commercial buildings), and the extent to which streamlined mechanisms are made available for sources to obtain legal limits on their PTE so that the programs are not applicable. No such decisions or interpretations have been made at this point and, as mentioned in the preamble, they will require significant time to develop. A s a result, our threshold anal ys is uniformly assumes that no PTE limits are in place for any of the affected sectors, which may likel y be the case in the immediate stages of GHG permitting for affected sources. There is significant uncertainty in both our modification rate for newl y major GHG sources and in our estimate of modification activity at existing major sources that will become subject to PSD review for GHG emission increases. The general uncertainty results from predicting not onl y how many major sources will undergo phy sical or operational changes in any given ye ar, but also which of those changes would result in GHG emissions increases that would exceed a proposed GHG significance level. First, information is not available across sectors and
so urce categories on the types and numbers of specific phys ical and operational changes that would result in GHG emissions increases in amounts that can be estimated and that therefore can be compared to various GHG emissions significance levels. Second, th ere is uncertainty in how many project modifications will occur within any given ye ar because decisions on these projects are driven b y facility

- and sector

- based growth patterns and business planning decisions. L astl y,

### 19

some source categories and units th at emit GHGs have not previousl y been subject to any typ e of permitting or reporting requirements; as a result, for these sources, there is very little historical record for use in estimating the number and types of projects that would occur at these sourc es and, in turn, establish an appropriate significance level for GHGs.
Uncertainties in Permitting Costs The primary

reference sources for our estimate of burden hours and costs for permitting GHGs are the most recent I CRs for the PSD and title V programs. There a number of uncertainties introduced in using these references for costing GHG permitting activities. First, we are assuming that the average, conventional pollutant per

-permit costs will be similar for GHGs. We do recognize the likelihood that residential and commercial permits would be simpler and have a lower per

-permit burden than traditional industrial sources, and have made adjustments for this: however, for industrial sources we assume per

-permit costs on par with what are estimated in the latest I CRs for PSD and title V programs. There is uncertainty in applying these average ICR
-based costs to GHG permitting, even for industrial sources, because there is no historical track record for permitting these GHG sources and thus any cost ef ficiencies that have been realized over the ye ars for conventional pollutant permitting, and thus reflected in the current ICRs, may not be initially realized for GHG permitting. For example, we assume the same public hearing estimate as included in the I CR for current PSD permits (i.e., that 1 in 50 major PSD permits require a hearing)

—for GHG sources this number may be higher initially if there ends up being significantly more public interest in these permits. We do believe overall, however, that large r facilities, especiall y those affected at higher threshold levels, will

### 20

have had sufficient permitting experience such that out ICR
- based costs should reasonabl y reflect the added burden of including GHGs. As mentioned above, in our burden scenario analyses we do discount the ICR

- based per

permit costs for residential and commercial sources to reflect what we believe will generally be simpler permits, involving primarily uniform combustion ty

pe equipment. For PSD we discount the per

-permit cost by

30%, an d for title V we discount the per

-permit cost by 50%. There is significant uncertainty in these estimated discounts since we have no track record for permitting these smaller commercial and residential sources. However, we do believe that, based solel y on the ty pe and uniformity of the GHG emission units that would be subject to permitting at these facilities under lower GHG threshold scenarios, that average per

-permit costs would be less than those currentl y experienced by more complex industrial facil ities, with numerous emission units, for currentl y regulated pollutants.

3. Evaluation of ICR- based Resource Requirements for Permitting Authorities at Different Possible GHG Permitting Thresholds For the proposal, EPA examined resource requirements at the statutory

- based 100/250 tpy CO 2 

### e emission levels

—

referred to as the ‘baseline’ anal ys is in the following tables

— as well as at 10,000 tpy , 25,000 tpy , and 50,000 tp y CO 2 

### e levels. Due to comments received on the proposal and this improved burden anal ys is, the 10,000 tpy threshold was eliminated as not being a viable alternative since it did not adequately address administrative necessity concerns. In this anal ys is, in addition to the baseline anal ys is, EPA broadened the options to consider thres holds ranging from a 25,000 tpy CO 2 

### e major source applicability level for PSD and title V up to a 100,000 tpy

CO 2 

### e level, with associated PSD GHG significant levels of equal magnitude. EPA

### 21

also considered the impact on burden of different PSD GHG significance levels combined with the 100,000 tpy

major source level, including 50,000 CO 2 

### e, 75,000 CO 2 

### e, and 100,000 CO 2 

### e. The choice of a PSD significance level also has a direct impact on title V burdens since a greater number of PSD permit requirements that result from modification activities will result in a greater number of necessary title V revisions.

PSD Permits Table 3

- 1 presents the estimated burden for permitting authorities at different possible PSD GHG major source applicability thresholds. Descripti ons of the different thresholds selected are provided below. Burden estimates for the PSD program are calculated based on listed values obtained from Tables 6

- 1 and 6

- 2 the NSR I CR. The ICR does not distinguish between new construction and modification actions; therefore, Table 3

- 1 combines the actions into permit preparation issuance based solel y on GHG emissions or the addition of GHG requirements to permits being issued for conventional sources, or “anyw ay” permits. PSD permit preparation and issuance is further divided into industrial and commercial/residential sources since less time is required for commercial/residential sources.

Baseline After receiving comments on the proposal and reevaluating the initial estimates, EPA has determine d the impact of regulating GHG emissions under current PSD statutory thresholds for applicability . B aseline burden and cost were calculated at the 100 tpy and 250 tpy major source permitting threshold (the 100 tpy threshold applies to the 28 source categories identified in the

### 22 Table 3 - 1. Additional Permitting Authority PSD Burden with GHG (Annual)
Activity Burden Hours per Permit Affected

Permits Total

Burden (hours) Total Cost

($2007) a 100/250 tpy Major /100 tpy Significance Threshold (“Baseline”) PSD Permit Preparation and Issuance

- Industrial 301 26,089 7,852,789 $606,392,367 PSD Permit Preparation and Issuance

- Commercial/Residentialb 210 55,509 11,656,890 $900,145,046 Additions to Current PSD Applications c 50 688 34,400 $2,656,368 Total Additional Bu rden 19,544,079 $1,509,193,780 25,000 tpy Major/ 25,000 tpy Significance Threshold PSD Permit Preparation and Issuance

- Industrial 301 9197 2,768,297 $213,767,894 PSD Permit Preparation and Issuance

- Commercial/Residential 210 63 13,230 $1,021 ,621 Additions to Current PSD Applications 50 688 34,400 $2,656,368 Total Additional Burden 2,815,927 $217,445,883 50,000 tpy Major/ 50,000 Significance Threshold PSD Permit Preparation and Issuance

- Industrial 301 1906 573,706 $44,301,577 PSD Permit Preparation and Issuance

- Commercial/Residential 210 28 5,880 $454,054 Additions to Current PSD Applications 50 688 34,400 $2,656,368 Total Additional Burden 613,986 $47,411,999 100,000 tpy Ma

jor/ 50,000 tpy Significance Threshold PSD Permit Preparation and Issuance

- Industrial 301 1809 544,509 $42,046,985 PSD Permit Preparation and Issuance

- Commercial/Residential 210 4 840 $64,865 Additions to Current PSD Applications 50 688 34,400 $2,656,368 Total Additional Burden 579,749 $44,768,218 100,000 tpy Ma

jor/ 75,000 tpy Significance Threshold PSD Permit Preparation and Issuance

- Industrial 301 915 275,415 $21,267,546 PSD Permit Preparation and Issuance

- Commercial/Residential 210 4 840 $64,865 Additions to Current PSD Applications 50 688 34,400 $2,656,368 Total Additional Burden 310,655 $23,988,779 100,000 tpy Ma

jor/ 100,000 tpy Significance Threshold PSD Permit Preparation and Issuance

- Industrial 301 20 6020 $464,864 PSD Permit Preparation and Issuance

- Commercial/Residential 210 4 840 $64,865 Additions to Current PSD Applications 50 688 34,400 $2,656,368 Total Additional Burden 41,260 $3,186,097 Non - GHG- Based T hreshold PSD Permit Preparation and Issuance

- Industrial 301 0 0 $ 0 PSD Permit Preparation and Issuance

- Commercial/Residential 210 0 0 $0 Additions to Current PSD Applications 50 688 34,400 $2,656,368 Total Additional Burden 34,400 $2,656,368

aLabor cost of $77.22/hr from Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Non

- Attainment Area New Source Review (Renewal), EPA ICR Number 1230.23, OMB Control Number 2060

- 0003, 2008. bAssume permit preparation and issuance for commercial/residential permits takes 70% the amount of time needed to prepare and issue an industrial permit.
c For current permit applications, assume it takes an additional 50 hours to include GHG requirements in the permit.

### 23

Clean Air Act section 169(1)). At these thresholds , the additional annual permitting burden for permitting authorities is estimated at 19.5 million hours at a cost of $1.5 billion.

Alternate Threshold Scenarios After determining the baseline, additional annual burden was determined at six different major stationary source threshold levels in order to evaluate the relative differences in impacts to permitting authorities. Estimates represent the additional burden and costs due to GHG permitting beyond to the burden currentl y experienced b y permitting authorities and sources. The first scenario is the threshold proposed in the GHG Tailoring Rule of 25,000 tpy CO 2 

### e. Results of this analysis indicate a total of 9,260 new permits, plus 688 permit actions to include GHG related requirements into current PSD permitting actions (including both new construction and modifications ). This additional workload equates to 2.8 million hours for permitting authorities at a cost of $217 million. Note this is an increase over our initial results at proposal of over 185,000 burden hours and $8.7 million. Again, increases are due to more
ac curate estimates of annual modifications and burden associated with commercial/residential permits. In creasing the emission threshold to 50,000 tpy will lead to an estimated 614,000 hours additional burden at a cost of $47.4 million. This scenario estimate s 1,934 new construction or modification activities will be subject to PSD permitting annually due to GHG. Setting a threshold of 100,000 tpy with a significance level of 50,000 tp y, permitting authorities will spend an estimated 580,000 hours preparing an d issuing permits, at a cost of $44.8 million. At this level, EPA estimates 1,813 new actions require PSD permits.

### 24

Next, at the 100,000 tpy

threshold with a 75,000 tpy significance level, the annual permitting authority burden will increase b y 311,000 hour s at a cost of $24 million. In this scenario, 919 new permit actions will occur annually

. At a 100,000 tpy

threshold, with a 100,000 tpy significance level for modifications, EPA estimates there are 20 new industrial PSD permit actions and four commercial/residential. Permitting authorities will spend an estimated 41,000 additional hours on permits at a cost of $3.2 million. The final scenario involves only sources that are required to get a PSD permit due to their
non - GHG emissions and then are further re quired to add GHG related requirements as a result of GHG emissions increases from modifications, or GHG emissions at newl y constructed facilities, exceeding a significance threshold of 75,000 tpy GHG. In this scenario, only the annual 688 PSD permit actio ns derived from the NSR I CR are expected to need the inclusion of GHG related requirements to the permits. The additional burden to permitting authorities under this scenario is estimated at 34,000 hours at a cost of $2.7 million.

Title V Permits Table 3

- 2 presents the estimated burden for permitting authorities at different possible title V GHG major source applicability thresholds. Descriptions of the different thresholds selected are provided below. Burden estimates are calculated and annual values derived from Tables 7 and 8 of the current Title V ICR. 29

29 For consistency, the permitting authority labor costs are updated to 2007 dollars utilizing the 2007 General Schedule Salary Table from the Office of Personnel Management.

### 25 Table 3 - 2. Additional Permitting Authority Title V Burden with GHG (Annual) Activity Burden Hour per Permit Affected

Permits Total Burden

(hours) Total Cost ($2007) b 100 tpy (associated with PSD 1 00/250 tpy maj./100 tpy sig.) New Permit Preparation and Issuance

– Industrial 428 71,829 30,742,812 $1,414,169,352 Add GHG component to new Non

- GHG Permitb 43 50 2,150 $98,900 New Permit Preparation and Issuance

- Commercial/Residential c 214 1,98 5,948 424,992,872 $19,549,672,112 Permit Revisions

- due to GHG 40 61,836 2,473,440 $113,778,240 Permit Revisions

- add GHG to Current Non

- GHG Permits 4 448 1,792 $82,432 Permit Renewals d 9 2,614 23,526 $1,082,196 Total Additional Burden 4 58,236,592 $21,078,883,232 25,000 tpy (associated with PSD 25,000 tpy maj./25,000 tpy sig.) New Permit Preparation and Issuance

– Industrial 428 2,103 899,941 $41,397,301 Add GHG component to new Non

- GHG Permit 43 50 2,150 $98,900 New Permit Prep aration and Issuance

- Commercial/Residential 214 444 94,945 $4,367,455 Permit Revisions

- due to GHG 40 9,197 367,880 $16,922,480 Permit Revisions

- add GHG to Current Non

- GHG Permits 4 448 1,792 $82,432 Permit Renewals 9 2,614 23,526 $1,082,196 Total Additional Burden 1,390,234 $63,950,764 50,000 tpy (associated with PSD 50,000 tpy maj./50,000 tpy sig.) New Permit Preparation and Issuance

– Industrial 428 981 419,868 $19,313,928 Add GHG component to new Non

- GHG Permit 43 50 2,150 $ 98,900 New Permit Preparation and Issuance

- Commercial/Residential 214 208 44,441 $2,044,271 Permit Revisions

- due to GHG 40 1,906 76,240 $3,507,040 Permit Revisions

- add GHG to Current Non

- GHG Permits 4 448 1,792 $82,432 Permit Renewals 9 2,614 23,526 $1,082,196 Total Additional Burden 568,017 $26,128,767 100,000 tpy (associated with PSD 100,000 tpy m aj./50,000 tpy sig.) New Permit Preparation and Issuance

– Industrial 428 172 73,473 $3,379,773 Add GHG component to new Non

- GH G Permit 43 50 2,150 $98,900 New Permit Preparation and Issuance

- Commercial/Residential 214 18 3,781 $173,911 Permit Revisions

- due to GHG 40 1,809 72,360 $3,328,560 Permit Revisions

- add GHG to Current Non

- GHG Permits 4 448 1,792 $82,432 Permit Renewals 9 2,614 23,526 $1,082,196 Total Additional Burden 177,082 $8,145,772

### 26 Table 3 - 2 cont’d . Additional Permitting Authority Title V Burden with GHG (Annual)
Activity Burden Hour per Permit Affected

Permits Total Burden

(hours) Total Cos t ($2007) b 100,000 tpy (associated with PSD 100,000 tpy m aj./75,000 tpy sig.) New Permit Preparation and Issuance

– Industrial 428 172 73,473 3,379,773 Add GHG component to new Non

- GHG Permit 43 50 2,150 $98,900 New Permit Preparation and Issuan ce - Commercial/Residential 214 18 3,781 $173,911 Permit Revisions

- due to GHG 40 915 36,600 $1,683,600 Permit Revisions

- add GHG to Current Non

- GHG Permits 4 448 1,792 $82,432 Permit Renewals 9 2,614 23,526 $1,082,196 Total Additional Burde n 141,322 $6,500,812 100,000 tpy (associated with 100,000 tpy m aj./ 100,000 tpy sig.) New Permit Preparation and Issuance

– Industrial 428 172 73,473 $3,379,773 Add GHG component to new Non

- GHG Permit 43 50 2,150 $98,900 New Permit Preparatio n and Issuance

- Commercial/Residential 214 18 3,781 $173,911 Permit Revisions

- due to GHG 40 20 800 $36,800 Permit Revisions

- add GHG to Current Non

- GHG Permits 4 448 1,792 $82,432 Permit Renewals 9 2,614 23,526 $1,082,196 Total Additional Burden 105,522 $4,854,012 Non - GHG Based Threshold New Permit Preparation and Issuance

– Industrial 428 0 0 0 Add GHG component to new Non

- GHG Permit 43 50 2,150 $98,900 New Permit Preparation and Issuance

- Commercial/Residential 21 0 0 $0 Permit Revisions

- due to GHG 40 0 0 $0 Permit Revisions

- add GHG to Current Non

- GHG Permits 4 448 1,792 $82,432 Permit Renewals 9 2,614 23,526 $1,082,196 Total Additional Burden 27,468 $1,263,528

a Salaries from Title V ICR adjusted to 20 07 dollars using 2007 OPM General Schedule Salary Table available at: http://www.opm.gov/oca/07tables/index.asp b In corporating GHG information/requirements into significant revisions and permit renewals adds an additional 10% of the current time (90 hours each)
c New commercial/residential permits require half the time needed for new industrial permits dThe Title V ICR estimates that 3,267 permits annually undergo renewal

- assume 80% of these involve combustion

### 27

Baseline EPA reevaluated our estimates of the additional administrative burden and cost of including GHG emitters in the title V program at the current 100 tpy statutory threshold level. To determine the impact of regulating GHG emissions under current title V program, baseline burden and cost are calculated at the 100 tp y threshold level, which is the generall y applied major source applicability level under title V. At the statutory threshold level, it is estimated that over six million sources will become newl y subject to title V. A source gen erall y must apply for a title V permit within one year of becoming subject to permitting, then the permitting authority must take final action (issue or deny) on the permit applications within 18 months of receipt. We expect these new permits will not be i ssued all at once, but rather will come in over a three

- ye ar time frame based on the statutory requirements listed above. Therefore, we assume that one

third of the newl y subject sources will appl y for and obtain a permit annually, requiring almost 460 mi llion burden hours to prepare and issue over two million new operating permits at an additional cost of $21.1 billion.

Alternate Threshold Scenarios After determining the baseline, additional burden was determined at six different major stationary source threshold levels in order to evaluate the relative differences in impacts to permitting authorities. Estimates represent the additional annual burden and costs due to GHG permitting beyond the burden and costs currently experienced by

permitting authoritie s and
sources. The first scenario is the threshold proposed in the GHG Tailoring Rule of 25,000 tpy CO 2 

### e. Results of this analysis indicate a total of 2,547 new permits, as well as 50 permits that

### 28

would need to include GHG requirements in their permits. This additional workload equates to 1.4 million hours for permitting authorities at a cost of $64 million. Note that this is an increase over our initial results at proposal of approximately 985,000 burden hours and $45 million. As with PSD programs, incre ases are due to more complete estimates of annual modifications and the revised burden associated with commercial/residential permits. In creasing the emission threshold to 50,000 tpy will lead to an estimated 568,000 hours additional burden at a cost of $2 6.1 million. This scenario estimates 1,189 new sources will be subject to title V permitting annually due to GHG. To examine the impact of significance levels on the overall burden, EPA considered the impact on burden of different PSD GHG significance leve ls of 50,000 CO 2 

### e, 75,000 CO 2 

### e, and 100,000 CO 2 

### e combined with the 100,000 tpy major source level The choice of a PSD significance level has a direct impact on title V burdens since a greater number of PSD permit requirements that result from modification activities will result in a greater number of necessary title V revisions. This effect is apparent in Table 3

- 2. Note that for all three scenarios, EPA estimates there are 172 industrial and 18 commercial/residential new title V permit actions due to GHG. Setting a threshold of 100,000 tpy with a PSD significance level of 50,000 tpy , permitting authorities will spend an estimated 177,000 hours preparing and issuing permits, at a cost of $8.1 million. Note that under this scenario, 1,809 revisions are estim ated annually to update existing operating permits due to modification activities. Utilizing a 75,000 tpy PSD significance level, the annual permitting authority burden is estimated to increase by 161,000 hours at a cost of $7.4 million. At this significance level, 915 operating permit revisions will be necessary due to GHG. This decrease from the previous scenario is due to fewer modifications exceeding the higher

### 29

significance level threshold and requiring revisions to an operating permit. At a 100,000 tp y threshold, with a 100,000 tpy PSD significance level for modifications, EPA estimates there are only 20 permit revisions annually . Permitting authorities will spend an estimated 106,000 additional hours on permits at a cost of $4.9 million. The final scenario involves only sources that are required to get a title V permit for emissions other than GHG and that are required to add GHG related requirements. Under this scenario, onl y the annual issuance of 50 permits noted in the Title V ICR are expected to n eed the inclusion of GHG related requirements to the permits. The additional burden to permitting authorities under this scenario is estimated at 27 million hours at a cost of $1.3 million.

4 . Burden Relief Estimates for Permitting Authorities and Sourc es at Several Possible GHG Major Source Applicability Threshold s for Title V and PSD
The following tables indicate the estimated burden relief when comparing the baseline levels with several threshold levels for GHG applicability as described in the previous sections. In Tables 4

- 1 through 4

- 4, the first three columns indicate the cost per permit and total cost to permitting authorities at a GHG threshold level equal to the statutory threshold levels for title V and PSD (100 and 100/250 tpy , respectivel y) . The next three columns reflect the estimated costs for permitting authorities with the permitting thresholds (both for PSD and title V) set at the specified levels. In the final three columns, the burden relief is estimated

– the time and costs alleviate d relative to the baseline levels by establishing several GHG permitting thresholds as previously

described. The burden relief for sources at the different permitting thresholds is presented in Tables 4
- 5, 4
- 6, and 4

- 7 below

. Table 4

- 8 estimates the cost savings if a n on - GHG b ased related trigger

### 30

is used. This information on burden relief was used to compile the final Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) for the final GHG tailoring rule. Please see the final RIA contained in the public docket for this GHG tail oring rule for a full explanation and description of the burden relief provided b y the final GHG tailoring rule actions.

### 31 Table 4 - 1. Estim ated Burden Relief for Permitting Authorities Utilizing a 25,000 tpy Major/ 25,000 tpy PSD Significance T hreshold All Title V 100tpy and PSD 250 tpy 25,000 tpy or Greater Avoided Burden
Activity Cost per Permit (2007$) Number

of Permits Total Cost

(2007$) Cost

per Permit (2007$) Number

of Permits Total Cost

(2007$) Cost

per Permit (2007$) Number

of Permit s Total Cost

(2007$) Title V Permits New Industrial

- Due to GHG $19,688 71,829 $1,414,175,915 $19,688 2,103 $41,403,864 $19,688 69,726 $1,372,772,051 Current Industrial

- Add GHG $1,978 50 $98,900 $1,978 50 $98,900 $1,978 0 $0 New Commercial/Res idential $9,844 1,985,948 $19,549,672,112 $9,844 444 $4,370,736 $9,844 1,985,504 $19,545,301,376 Permit Revisions

- Due to GHG $1,840 61,836 $113,778,240 $1,840 9,197 $16,922,480 $1,840 52,639 $96,855,760 Permit Revisions

- Add GHG $184 448 $82,432 $184 448 $82,432 $184 0 $0 Permit Renewals $414 2,614 $1,082,196 $414 2,614 $1,082,196 $414 0 $0 Total Permits Affected 2,122,725 14,856 2,107,869 PSD Permits New Industrial $23,243 26,089 $606,386,627 $23,243 9,197 $213,765,871 $23, 243 16,892 $392,620,756 New Commercial/Residential $16,216 55,509 $900,133,944 $16,216 63 $1,021,608 $16,216 55,446 $899,112,336 Current Applications

- Add GHG $3,861 688 $2,656,368 $3,861 688 $2,656,368 $3,861 0 $0 Total Permits Affected 82,28 6 9,948 72,338 Total Permitting Authority Costs $22,588,066,734 $281,404,455 $22,306,662,279

### 32 Table 4 - 2. Estim ated Burden Relief for Permitting Authorities Utilizing a 50,000 tpy Major/50,000 tpy PSD Significance Threshold All Title V 100tpy and PSD 250 tpy 50,000 tpy or Greater Avoided Burden
Activity Cost per Permit (2007$) Number

of Permits Total Cost

(2007$) Cost

per Permit (2007$) Number

of Permits Total Cost

(2007$) Cost

per Permit (2007$) Number

of Permits Total Co st

(2007$) Title V Permits New Industrial

- Due to GHG $19,688 71,829 $1,414,175,915 $19,688 981 $19,313,928 $19,688 70,848 $1,394,861,987 Current Industrial

- Add GHG $1,978 50 $98,900 $1,978 50 $98,900 $1,978 0 $0 New Commercial/Residential $9 ,844 1,985,948 $19,549,672,112 $9,844 208 $2,047,552 $9,844 1,985,740 $19,547,624,560 Permit Revisions

- Due to GHG $1,840 61,836 $113,778,240 $1,840 1,906 $3,507,040 $1,840 59,930 $110,271,200 Permit Revisions

- Add GHG $184 448 $82,432 $184 448 $82 ,432 $184 0 $0 Permit Renewals $414 2,614 $1,082,196 $414 2,614 $1,082,196 $414 0 $0 Total Permits Affected 2,122,725 6,207 2,116,518 PSD Permits New Industrial $23,243 26,089 $606,386,627 $23,243 1,906 $44,301,158 $23,243 24,183 $56 2,085,469 New Commercial/Residential $16,216 55,509 $900,133,944 $16,216 28 $454,048 $16,216 55,481 $899,679,896 Current Applications

- Add GHG $3,861 688 $2,656,368 $3,861 688 $2,656,368 $3,861 0 $0 Total Permits Affected 82,286 2,622 79,664 Total Permitting Authority Costs $22,588,066,734 $73,543,622 $22,514,523,112

### 33 Table 4 - 3. Estim ated Burden Relief for Permitting Authorities Utilizing a 100,000 tpy Major/75,000 tpy PSD Significance Threshold All Title V 100 tpy and PSD 250 tpy 100,000 tpy; 75,000 tpy or Greater Avoided Burden
Activity Cost per Permit (2007$) Number

of Permits Total Cost

(2007$) Cost

per Permit (2007$) Number

of Permits Total Cost

(2007$) Cost

per Permit (2007$) Number

of Permits Total Cost

( 2007$) Title V Permits New Industrial

- Due to GHG $19,688 71,829 $1,414,175,915 $19,688 172 $3,386,336 $19,688 71,657 $1,410,789,579 Current Industrial

- Add GHG $1,978 50 $98,900 $1,978 50 $98,900 $1,978 0 $0 New Commercial/Residential $9,844 1,985,948 $19,549,672,112 $9,844 18 $177,192 $9,844 1,985,930 $19,549,494,920 Permit Revisions

- Due to GHG $1,840 61,836 $113,778,240 $1,840 915 $1,683,600 $1,840 60,921 $112,094,640 Permit Revisions

- Add GHG $184 448 $82,432 $184 448 $82,432 $184 0 $0 Permit Renewals $414 2,614 $1,082,196 $414 2,614 $1,082,196 $414 0 $0 Total Permits Affected 2,122,725 4,217 2,118,508 PSD Permits New Industrial $23,243 26,089 $606,386,627 $23,243 915 $21,267,345 $23,243 25,174 $585,119,282 New Commercial/Residential $16,216 55,509 $900,133,944 $16,216 4 $64,864 $16,216 55,505 $900,069,080 Current Applications

- Add GHG $3,861 688 $2,656,368 $3,861 688 $2,656,368 $3,861 0 $0 Total Permits Affected 82,286 1,607 80,679 Tota l Permitting Authority Costs $22,588,066,734 $30,499,233 $22,557,567,501

### 34 Table 4 - 4. Estim ated Burden Relief for Permitting Authorities Utilizing a Non - GHG Trigger

All Title V 100tpy and PSD 250 tpy Non - GHG Trigger Avoided Burden
Activity Cost per Permit (2007$) Number

of Permits Total Cost

(2007$) Cost

per Permit (2007$) Number

of Permits Total Cost

(2007$) Cost

per Permit (2007$) Number

of Permits Total Cost

(2007$) Title V Permits New Industrial

- Due to GHG $19,688 71,829 $ 1,414,175,915 $19,688 0 $0 $19,688 71,829 $1,414,175,915 Current Industrial

- Add GHG $1,978 50 $98,900 $1,978 50 $98,900 $1,978 0 $0 New Commercial/Residential $9,844 1,985,948 $19,549,672,112 $9,844 0 $0 $9,844 1,985,948 $19,549,672,112 Permit Revisions

- Due to GHG $1,840 61,836 $113,778,240 $1,840 0 $0 $1,840 61,836 $113,778,240 Permit Revisions

- Add GHG $184 448 $82,432 $184 448 $82,432 $184 0 $0 Permit Renewals $414 2,614 $1,082,196 $414 2,614 $1,082,196 $414 0 $0 Total Permits Aff

ected 2,122,725 3,112 2,119,613 PSD Permits New Industrial $23,243 26,089 $606,386,627 $23,243 0 $0 $23,243 26,089 $606,386,627 New Commercial/Residential $16,216 55,509 $900,133,944 $16,216 0 $0 $16,216 55,509 $900,133,944 Current Applications

- Add GHG $3,861 688 $2,656,368 $3,861 688 $2,656,368 $3,861 0 $0 Total Permits Affected 82,286 688 81,598 Total Permitting Authority Costs $22,588,066,734 $3,919,896 $22,584,146,838

### 35 Table 4 - 5. Estim ated Burden Relief for Sources Utilizing a 25,000 tpy Major/25,000 tpy PSD Significance Threshold

All Title V 100tpy and PSD 250 tpy 25,000 tpy or Greater Avoided Burden
Activity Cost per Permit (2007$) Number

of Permits Total Cost

(2007$) Cost

per Permit (2007$) Number

of Permits Total Cost

(2007$) Cost

per Permit (2007$) Number

of Permits Total Cost

(2007$) Title V Permits New Industrial

- Due to GHG $46,350 71,829 $3,329,289,600 $46,350 2,103 $97,474,050 $46,350 69,726 $3,231,815,550 Current Industrial

- Add GHG $4,440 50 $222,000 $4,440 50 $222,000 $4,440 0 $0 New Commercial/Residential $23,175 1,985,948 $46,024,344,900 $23,175 444 $10,289,700 $23,175 1,985,504 $46,014,055,200 Permit Revisions

- Due to GHG $1,677 61,836 $103,698,972 $1,677 9,197 $ 15,423,369 $1,677 52,639 $88,275,603 Permit Revisions

- Add GHG $156 448 $69,888 $156 448 $69,888 $156 0 $0 Permit Renewals $780 2,614 $2,038,920 $780 2,614 $2,038,920 $780 0 $0 Total Permits Affected 2,122,725 14,856 2,107,869 PSD Pe rmits New Industrial $84,530 26,089 $2,205,303,170 $84,530 9,197 $777,422,410 $84,530 16,892 $1,427,880,760 New Commercial/Residential $59,152 55,509 $3,283,468,368 $59,152 63 $3,726,576 $59,152 55,446 $3,279,741,792 Current Applications

- Add GHG $21,669 688 $14,908,272 $21,669 688 $14,908,272 $21,669 0 $0 Total Permits Affected 82,286 9,948 72,338 Total Source Costs $54,963,344,090 $921,575,185 $54,041,768,905

### 36 Table 4 - 6. Estim ated Burden Relief for Sources Utilizing a 50,000 tpy Major/50,000 tpy PSD Significance Threshold

All Title V 100tpy and PSD 250 tpy 50,000 tpy or Greater Avoided Burden
Activity Cost per Permit (2007$) Number

of Permits Total Cost

(2007$) Cost

per Permit (2007$) Number

of Permits Tota l Cost

(2007$) Cost

per Permit (2007$) Number

of Permits Total Cost

(2007$) Title V Permits New Industrial

- Due to GHG $46,350 71,829 $3,329,289,600 $46,350 981 $45,469,350 $46,350 70,848 $3,283,820,250 Current Industrial

- Add GHG $4,440 50 $222,0 00 $4,440 50 $222,000 $4,440 0 $0 New Commercial/Residential $23,175 1,985,948 $46,024,344,900 $23,175 208 $4,820,400 $23,175 1,985,740 $46,019,524,500 Permit Revisions

- Due to GHG $1,677 61,836 $103,698,972 $1,677 1,906 $3,196,362 $1,677 59,930 $1 00,502,610 Permit Revisions

- Add GHG $156 448 $69,888 $156 448 $69,888 $156 0 $0 Permit Renewals $780 2,614 $2,038,920 $780 2,614 $2,038,920 $780 0 $0 Total Permits Affected 2,122,725 6,207 2,116,518 PSD Permits New Industrial $8 4,530 26,089 $2,205,303,170 $84,530 1,906 $161,114,180 $84,530 24,183 $2,044,188,990 New Commercial/Residential $59,152 55,509 $3,283,468,368 $59,152 28 $1,656,256 $59,152 55,481 $3,281,812,112 Current Applications

- Add GHG $21,669 688 $14,908,272 $21,669 688 $14,908,272 $21,669 0 $0 Total Permits Affected 82,286 2,622 79,664 Total Source Costs $54,963,344,090 $233,495,628 $54,729,848,462

### 37 Table 4 - 7. Estim ated Burden Relief for Sources Utilizing a 100,000 tpy M ajor/75,000 tpy PSD Significance Threshold

All Title V 100tpy and PSD 250 tpy 100,000 tpy; 75,000 tpy or Greater Avoided Burden
Activity Cost per Permit (2007$) Number

of Permits Total Cost

(2007$) Cost

per Permit (2007$) Number

of Permits Total Cost

( 2007$) Cost

per Permit (2007$) Number

of Permits Total Cost

(2007$) Title V Permits New Industrial

- Due to GHG $46,350 71,829 $3,329,289,600 $46,350 172 $7,972,200 $46,350 71,657 $3,321,317,400 Current Industrial

- Add GHG $4,440 50 $222,000 $4,440 50 $222,000 $4,440 0 $0 New Commercial/Residential $23,175 1,985,948 $46,024,344,900 $23,175 18 $417,150 $23,175 1,985,930 $46,023,927,750 Permit Revisions

- Due to GHG $1,677 61,836 $103,698,972 $1,677 915 $1,534,455 $1,677 60,921 $102,164,517 Permit Revisions

- Add GHG $156 448 $69,888 $156 448 $69,888 $156 0 $0 Permit Renewals $780 2,614 $2,038,920 $780 2,614 $2,038,920 $780 0 $0 Total Permits Affected 2,122,725 4,217 2,118,508 PSD Permits New Industrial $84,530 26,089 $ 2,205,303,170 $84,530 915 $77,344,950 $84,530 25,174 $2,127,958,220 New Commercial/Residential $59,152 55,509 $3,283,468,368 $59,152 4 $236,608 $59,152 55,505 $3,283,231,760 Current Applications

- Add GHG $21,669 688 $14,908,272 $21,669 688 $14,908, 272 $21,669 0 $0 Total Permits Affected 82,286 1,607 80,679 Total Source Costs $54,963,344,090 $104,744,443 $54,858,599,647

### 38 Table 4 - 8. Estim ated Burden Relief for Sources Utilizing a Non - GHG Trigger All Title V 100tpy and PSD 250 tpy Non - GHG Trigger Avoided Burden
Activity Cost per Permit (2007$) Number

of Permits Total Cost

(2007$) Cost

per Permit (2007$) Number

of Permits Total Cost

(2007$) Cost

per Permit (2007$) Number

of Permits Total Cost

(2007$) Title V Permit s New Industrial

- Due to GHG $46,350 71,829 $3,329,289,600 $46,350 0 $0 $46,350 71,829 $3,329,289,600 Current Industrial

- Add GHG $4,440 50 $222,000 $4,440 50 $222,000 $4,440 0 $0 New Commercial/Residential $23,175 1,985,948 $46,024,344,900 $23 ,175 0 $0 $23,175 1,985,948 $46,024,344,900 Permit Revisions

- Due to GHG $1,677 61,836 $103,698,972 $1,677 0 $0 $1,677 61,836 $103,698,972 Permit Revisions

- Add GHG $156 448 $69,888 $156 448 $69,888 $156 0 $0 Permit Renewals $780 2,614 $2,038,92 0 $780 2,614 $2,038,920 $780 0 $0 Total Permits Affected 2,122,725 3,112 2,119,613 PSD Permits New Industrial $84,530 26,089 $2,205,303,170 $84,530 0 $0 $84,530 26,089 $2,205,303,170 New Commercial/Residential $59,152 55,509 $3,283, 468,368 $59,152 0 $0 $59,152 55,509 $3,283,468,368 Current Applications

- Add GHG $21,669 688 $14,908,272 $21,669 688 $14,908,272 $21,669 0 $0 Total Permits Affected 82,286 688 81,598 Total Source Costs $54,963,344,090 $17,239,08 0 $54,946,105,010

### 39 APPENDIX A Table A - 1. Newly Major A ffected Source Estimates Based on Threshold Level Source Type 100/250 tpy PSD 100 tpy Title V 25,000 tpy 50,000 tpy 100,000 tpy EGUs 285 285 124 0 0 Industrial 141,160 170,910 4,002 1,934 256 Oil/Gas/Coal production 2,588 2,588 187 75 52 Wa ste Treatment 3,344 3,358 1,927 910 193 Commercial 731,477 1,355,921 1,161 600 51 Residential 182,350 4,535,500 160 20 0 Total 1,061,204 6,068,562 7,561 3,539 552 Based on information contained in the “Technical Support Document for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Thresholds Evaluation;” Office of Air Quality Policy and Standards; March 29, 2010 and information retrieved from EPA's enforcement and compliance history online (ECHO) database during Jan

uary 2010. ECHO is a computer

- data based created and maintained by the EPA that contains source

- specific data submitted primarily by state and local environmental agencies. See http://www.epa

- echo.gov/echo/index.html.

### 40

United States Environmental Prote ction Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Health and Environmental Impacts

Division Research Triangle Park, NC Publication No. EPA

452/R

- 10
- 003 April 2010