6560-50-P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 98

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0925; FRL- ] 

RIN 2060-AQ02 

Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action amends the Final Mandatory Reporting 

of Greenhouse Gases Rule to require reporters subject to 

the rule to provide: the name, address, and percentage 

ownership of their U.S. parent company(s); their primary 

North American Industry Classification System code(s) as 

well as all additional applicable North American Industry 

Classification System code(s); and an indication of whether 

or not any of their reported emissions are from a 

cogeneration unit. This final action also corrects an 

editorial error in revisions made to the General Provisions 

published earlier this year. 

DATES: The final rule is effective on [INSERT DATE 60 DAYS 

AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action 

under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0925. All documents in 

the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov website. 
Page 2 of 87 

Although listed in the index, some information is not 

publicly available, e.g., confidential business information 

(CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted 

by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted 

material, is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly 

available docket materials are available either 

electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy 

at EPA’s Docket Center, Public Reading Room, EPA West 

Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20004. This Docket Facility is open from 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 

legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public 

Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number 

for the Air Docket is (202) 566-1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information 

and implementation materials, please go to the website 

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/ghgrulemaking.ht

ml. To submit a question, select Rule Help Center, 

followed by Contact Us. You may also contact Carole Cook, 

Climate Change Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs 

(MC-6207J), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone 
Page 3 of 87 

number: (202) 343-9263; fax number: (202) 343-2342; e-mail 

address: GHGMRR@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulated Entities. This amendment to 40 CFR part 98 

affects facilities that are direct emitters of GHGs, and 

suppliers of fuels and industrial gases that are already 

subject to the rule. Regulated categories and entities 

include those listed in Table 1 of this preamble. 

Table 1. Examples of Regulated Entities by Category 

Category 

NAICS 

Code Examples of Regulated Entities 

Facilities operating boilers, 

process heaters, incinerators, 

turbines, and internal combustion 

engines: 

211 Extractors of crude petroleum and 

natural gas. 

321 Manufacturers of lumber and wood 

products. 

322 Pulp and paper mills. 

325 Chemical manufacturers. 

324 Petroleum refineries and 

manufacturers of coal products. 

316, 326, 

339 

Manufacturers of rubber and 

miscellaneous plastic products. 

331 Steel works, blast furnaces. 

332 Electroplating, plating, polishing, 

anodizing, and coloring. 

336 Manufacturers of motor vehicle 

parts and accessories. 

221 Electric, gas, and sanitary 

services. 

622 Health services. 

611 Educational services.

General 

Stationary Fuel 

Combustion 

Sources 

325193 Ethyl alcohol manufacturing 

facilities 
Page 4 of 87 

Category 

NAICS 

Code Examples of Regulated Entities 

Electricity 

Generation 

221112 Fossil-fuel fired electric 

generating units, including units 

owned by Federal and municipal 

governments and units located in 

Indian Country. 

Adipic Acid 

Production 

325199 Adipic acid manufacturing 

facilities. 

Aluminum 

Production 

331312 Primary Aluminum production 

facilities. 

Ammonia 

Manufacturing 

325311 Anhydrous and aqueous ammonia 

manufacturing facilities. 

Cement 

Production 

327310 Portland Cement manufacturing 

plants. 

Ferroalloy 

Production 

331112 Ferroalloys manufacturing 

facilities. 

Glass Production 327211 Flat glass manufacturing 

facilities. 

327213 Glass container manufacturing 

facilities. 

327212 Other pressed and blown glass and 

glassware manufacturing facilities. 

HCFC-22 

Production and 

HFC-23 

Destruction 

325120 Chlorodifluoromethane manufacturing 

facilities. 

Hydrogen 

Production 

325120 Hydrogen manufacturing facilities. 

Iron and Steel 

Production 

331111 Integrated iron and steel mills, 

steel companies, sinter plants, 

blast furnaces, basic oxygen 

process furnace shops. 

Lead Production 331419 Primary lead smelting and refining 

facilities. 

331492 Secondary lead smelting and 

refining facilities. 

Lime Production 327410 Calcium oxide, calcium hydroxide, 

dolomitic hydrates manufacturing 

facilities. 

331419 Primary refiners of nonferrous 

metals by electrolytic methods. 

Magnesium 

Production 

331492 Secondary magnesium processing 

plants. 

Nitric Acid 

Production 

325311 Nitric acid manufacturing 

facilities. 
Page 5 of 87 

Category 

NAICS 

Code Examples of Regulated Entities 

32511 Ethylene dichloride manufacturing 

facilities. 

Petrochemical 

Production 

325199 Acrylonitrile, ethylene oxide, 

methanol manufacturing facilities. 

325110 Ethylene manufacturing facilities. 

325182 Carbon black manufacturing 

facilities. 

Petroleum 

Refineries 

324110 Petroleum refineries. 

Phosphoric Acid 

Production 

325312 Phosphoric acid manufacturing 

facilities. 

Pulp and Paper 322110 Pulp mills. 

Manufacturing 322121 Paper mills. 

322130 Paperboard mills. 

Silicon Carbide 

Production 

327910 Silicon carbide abrasives 

manufacturing facilities. 

325181 Alkalies and chlorine manufacturing 

facilities. 

Soda Ash 

Manufacturing 

212391 Soda ash, natural, mining and/or 

beneficiation. 

Titanium Dioxide 

Production 

325188 Titanium dioxide manufacturing 

facilities. 

212113 Underground anthracite coal mining 

operations. 

Underground Coal 

Mines 

212112 Underground bituminous coal mining 

operations. 

Zinc Production 331419 Primary zinc refining facilities. 

331492 Zinc dust reclaiming facilities, 

recovering from scrap and/or 

alloying purchased metals. 

Municipal Solid 

Waste Landfills 

562212 Solid waste landfills. 

221320 Sewage treatment facilities. 

562212 Solid waste landfills. 

322110 Pulp mills. 

322121 Paper mills. 

322122 Newsprint mills. 

322130 Paperboard mills. 

311611 Meat processing facilities. 

311411 Frozen fruit, juice, and vegetable 

manufacturing facilities. 

311421 Fruit and vegetable canning 

facilities. 

Industrial Waste 

Landfills 

221320 Sewage treatment facilities. 

562212 Solid waste landfills. 

322110 Pulp mills. 

Industrial 

Wastewater 

Treatment 322121 Paper mills. 
Page 6 of 87 

Category 

NAICS 

Code Examples of Regulated Entities 

322122 Newsprint mills. 

322130 Paperboard mills. 

311611 Meat processing facilities. 

311411 Frozen fruit, juice, and vegetable 

manufacturing facilities. 

311421 Fruit and vegetable canning 

facilities. 

221320 Sewage treatment facilities. 

325193 Ethyl alcohol manufacturing 

facilities 

Manure 

Managementa

112111 Beef cattle feedlots. 

112120 Dairy cattle and milk production 

facilities. 

112210 Hog and pig farms. 

112310 Chicken egg production facilities. 

112330 Turkey Production 

112320 Broilers and Other Meat type 

Chicken Production. 

Suppliers of 

Coal Based 

Liquids Fuels 

211111 Coal liquefaction at mine sites. 

Suppliers of 

Petroleum 

Products 

324110 Petroleum refineries. 

221210 Natural gas distribution 

facilities. 

Suppliers of 

Natural Gas and 

NGLs 211112 Natural gas liquid extraction 

facilities. 

Suppliers of 

Industrial GHGs 

325120 Industrial gas manufacturing 

facilities. 

Suppliers of 

Carbon Dioxide 

(CO2) 

325120 Industrial gas manufacturing 

facilities. 

a EPA will not be implementing subpart JJ of the Mandatory GHG Reporting 

Rule using funds provided in its FY2010 appropriations due to a 

Congressional restriction prohibiting the expenditure of funds for this 

purpose.

Table 1 of this preamble is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers 

regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. 

Table 1 of this preamble lists the types of entities that 

may be reporting under 40 CFR part 98 and, therefore, may 
Page 7 of 87 

be affected by this action. However, other types of 

entities not listed in the table could also be subject to 

reporting requirements. To determine whether an entity is 

affected by this action, you should carefully examine the 

applicability criteria found in 40 CFR part 98, subpart A. 

EPA has also proposed reporting requirements for several 

other source categories (rule subparts). If these subparts 

are finalized, entities subject to them would be also 

subject to this action starting with their first reports. 

The following subparts have been proposed, but not yet 

finalized, by EPA: 

• 40 CFR part 98, subpart I (Electronics Manufacturing) 

(75 FR 18652, April 12, 2010); 

• 40 CFR part 98, subpart L (Fluorinated Gas Production) 

(75 FR 18652, April 12, 2010); 

• 40 CFR part 98, subpart W (Petroleum and Natural Gas 

Systems) (75 FR 18608, April 12, 2010); 

• 40 CFR part 98, subpart DD (Electric Transmission and 

Distribution Equipment Use) (75 FR 18652, April 12, 

2010); 

• 40 CFR part 98, subpart QQ (Imports and Exports of 

Fluorinated GHGs Inside Pre-charged Equipment and 

Closed-cell Foams (75 FR 18652, April 12, 2010); 

• 40 CFR part 98, subpart RR (Injection and Geologic 

Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide (75 FR 18576, April 

12, 2010); and 

• 40 CFR part 98, subpart SS (Electrical Equipment 

Manufacture or Refurbishment) (75 FR 18652, April 12, 

2010). 

If you have questions regarding the applicability of 

this action to a particular entity, consult the website or 
Page 8 of 87 

the person listed in the preceding “FOR FURTHER GENERAL 

INFORMATION CONTACT” section. 

Judicial Review. 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, judicial review of 

this final rule is available only by filing a petition for 

review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia Circuit by [INSERT THE DATE 60 DAYS AFTER 

PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. Note, under CAA 

section 307(b)(2), the requirements established by this 

final rule may not be challenged separately in any civil or 

criminal proceedings brought by EPA to enforce these 

requirements. 

Acronyms and Abbreviations. The following acronyms 

and abbreviations are used in this document. 

CAA Clean Air Act 

CBI confidential business information 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

CO2 carbon dioxide 

CO2e CO2-equivalent 

CUSIP Committee on Uniform Security Identification 

Procedures 

DUNS Data Universal Numbering System 

EIA Economic Impact Analysis 

EO Executive Order 

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

FEIN Federal Employer Identification Numbers 

GHG greenhouse gas 

GHGRP Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program 

HCFC hydrochlorofluorocarbon 
Page 9 of 87 

HFC hydrofluorocarbon 

ICR Information Collection Request 

LDC Local Distribution Company 

NAICS North American Industry Classification System 

NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act 

of 1995 

OMB Office of Management and Budget 

SBREFA Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness 

Act 

SEC Securities and Exchange Commission 

TRI Toxics Release Inventory 

UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

U.S. United States 

Table of Contents 

I. Background

A. Background on the Final Rule

B. Summary of the Final Rule

C. Legal Authority

D. Relationship to Other Programs

II. The Final Rule and Reponses to Public Comments

A. U.S. Parent Company

B. NAICS Code(s)

C. Cogeneration

D. Frequency of Reporting

E. Applicability of the Reporting Requirements

F. Miscellaneous Public Comments and Responses

G. Correction to subpart A

III. Economic Impacts of the Final Rule

A. How were compliance costs estimated?

B. What are the costs of the rule?

C. What are the economic impacts of the rule?

D. What are the impacts of the rule on small businesses?

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments
Page 10 of 87 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that Significantly 

Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and LowIncome Populations

K. Congressional Review Act

I. Background 

A. Background on the Final Rule

On April 12, 2010, EPA proposed this rule amending 40 

CFR part 98, which provides the regulatory framework for 

the GHG Reporting Program (GHGRP).1 The GHGRP requires the 

reporting of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other 

relevant information from certain source categories in the 

United States (U.S). The GHGRP, which became effective 

December 29, 2009, includes reporting requirements for 

facilities that emit GHGs (“facilities”) and for suppliers 

of fuels and industrial gases (“suppliers”). Facilities 

and suppliers that meet the applicability criteria in 40 

CFR part 98, subpart A (“regulated entities” or 

“reporters”) must submit annual GHG reports in accordance 

with the provisions in 40 CFR 98.3(c).2 For more detailed 

background information on the GHGRP, see the preamble to 

 

1 GHGRP refers to the implementation of 40 CFR part 98. 

2 Because mobile sources are not covered under 40 CFR part 98, this rule 

does not apply to them. 
Page 11 of 87 

the final rule that established the program (74 FR 56260, 

October 30, 2009). 

This rule amends 40 CFR part 98 to include new 

requirements for reporters to provide information on their 

U.S. parent company(s), on their primary and additional 

applicable North American Industry Classification System 

(NAICS) code(s), and on whether any of their reported 

emissions are from a cogeneration unit (also called 

combined heat and power). Facilities and suppliers subject 

to 40 CFR part 98 must provide this additional information 

in their annual reports. This action also amends 40 CFR 

part 98, subpart A to correct a drafting error in the 

revisions to 40 CFR 98.2(a)(2) published on July 12, 2010 

(75 FR 39758). 

This preamble is divided into four sections. The 

first section of the preamble provides background and an 

overview of the final rule, discusses EPA’s legal authority 

under the Clean Air Act (CAA) for collecting the additional 

information and summarizes the relationship between this 

information and the information already collected by other 

programs. The second section of the preamble describes the 

new reporting requirements finalized by this action, 

describes major changes since proposal, discusses public 

comments and EPA responses, and describes the revisions 
Page 12 of 87 

made to 40 CFR 98.2(a)(2) to correct the editorial error 

published on July 12, 2010. The third section of the 

preamble provides a summary of the impacts and costs of the 

final rule and discusses comments on the regulatory impacts 

analyses. The fourth and final section of the preamble 

discusses the various statutory and executive order 

requirements applicable to the final rule. 

B. Summary of the Final Rule

This action amends 40 CFR part 98 by adding several 

data elements to the list specified in 40 CFR 98.3. These 

data elements must be included in the annual GHG reports 

that facilities and suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 98 are 

required to submit. Specifically, this rule requires each 

reporter to (1) Provide the names and physical addresses of 

all of its U.S. parent companies and their respective 

percentages of ownership; (2) provide its primary NAICS 

code(s) and all additional applicable NAICS code(s); and 

(3) indicate whether any of its reported emissions are from 

a cogeneration unit located at the facility. 

This rule applies to all facilities and suppliers 

required to report under 40 CFR part 98, including those 

covered by subparts published on October 30, 2009 (74 FR 
Page 13 of 87 

56260) and on July 12, 2010 (75 FR 39736).3 Therefore, all 

facilities and suppliers that meet the applicability 

criteria in 40 CFR part 98, subpart A are required to 

report the additional data elements included in this rule.4

C. Legal Authority

EPA is finalizing this rule under the existing 

authority provided in CAA section 114. As noted in the 

preamble to the Final Rule for Mandatory Reporting of GHGs 

(Part 98), CAA section 114 provides EPA with broad 

authority to require the information mandated by this final 

rule because such information will inform EPA’s 

implementation of various CAA provisions (74 FR 66264). 

Under CAA section 114(a)(1), the Administrator may require 

emission sources, persons subject to the CAA, manufacturers 

of emission control or process equipment, or persons whom 

the Administrator believes may have necessary information, 

to monitor and report emissions and to provide such other 

information as the Administrator requests for the purposes 

of carrying out any provision of the CAA (except for a 

provision of title II with respect to motor vehicles). 

 

3 If additional categories are finalized in 40 CFR part 98, then this rule 

applies to those categories as well. 

4 EPA will not be implementing subpart JJ of the Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule 

using funds provided in its FY2010 appropriations due to a Congressional 

restriction prohibiting the expenditure of funds for this purpose. 
Page 14 of 87 

As discussed in greater detail in Sections I.C and 

II.Q of the preamble to the final Part 98 rule and in the 

response to comments for 40 CFR part 985, EPA may gather 

information for a variety of purposes, including for the 

purpose of assisting in the development of emissions 

standards under CAA section 111, determining compliance 

with implementation plans or standards, or more broadly for 

“carrying out any provision” of the CAA. 

In particular, CAA section 103 authorizes EPA to 

establish a national research and development program, 

including nonregulatory approaches and technologies, for 

the prevention and control of air pollution, including 

GHGs. The data collected under this final rule would be 

immediately available to EPA and could inform EPA’s 

implementation of CAA section 103(g) regarding improvements 

in sector-based nonregulatory strategies and technologies 

for preventing or reducing air pollutants. 

The data collected through this final rule would be 

immediately available to EPA and could be used for the 

purposes of providing additional information to support 

 

5 Responses to major comments can be found in the preamble to the final 

Part 98 (74 FR 56260). Responses to additional comments can be found 

in volumes 1 through 42 of the response to comments document entitled 

"Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: EPA's Response to Public 

Comments" in docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0508 (see 

http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#docketDetail?R=EPA-HQOAR-2008-0508). 
Page 15 of 87 

more effective research and develop actions to address GHG 

emissions. For example, corporate parent and NAICS data 

would assist EPA in developing and improving emission 

inventories, as well as characterizing emissions data in 

several different ways. A more detailed understanding of 

the sources and operational categories of GHG emissions 

could lead to improvements in air pollution emissions 

information that is relied upon to develop effective 

control strategies. For example, EPA could use the NAICS 

code information gathered by this rule to compare results 

both within industries and across industry sectors. 

Finally, the information gathered through this rule 

will be immediately available to enhance EPA’s 

implementation of various nonregulatory programs aimed at 

encouraging voluntary reductions of GHG emissions. Under 

the authority of CAA section 103, EPA has launched a 

variety of nonregulatory programs aimed at reducing 

emissions of GHGs6. The additional data will assist EPA by 

providing more detailed information on possible sources, 

and facility operations within industrial sectors for EPA 

to work with in the context of these programs. 

Given the broad scope of CAA section 114, it is 

appropriate for EPA to gather the information required by 

 

6 For example, Climate Leaders, Combined Heat and Power Partnership, and 

Energy Star 
Page 16 of 87 

this final rule because such information is relevant to 

EPA’s implementation of a wide variety of CAA provisions 

and the burden of submitting such information is low. 

D. Relationship to Other Programs

EPA investigated other Federal and non-Federal 

reporting programs that collect information similar to the 

information that EPA will collect under this rule to 

determine if any existing sources of information met all 

EPA’s objectives. These objectives included: identifying 

each reporter’s highest-level U.S. parent company(s); 

identifying each reporter’s primary and any additional 

applicable NAICS codes; identifying facilities using 

cogeneration; covering all reporters subject to 40 CFR part 

98; collecting data annually; and having the information 

available to EPA. This section of the preamble summarizes 

EPA’s findings from our review of other programs. For 

additional information on reporting requirements for these 

data elements in existing Federal and non-Federal programs, 

please see Section I.D of the proposal preamble (75 FR 

18455, April 12, 2010) and the following memoranda “Review 

of Non-Federal Existing Greenhouse Gas Reporting Programs 

Requiring Reporting of Parent Company Ownership” and 

“Summary of Existing State Greenhouse Gas Reporting 

Programs” located in Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0925. 
Page 17 of 87 

1. EPA and Other Federal Data Collection Programs

Federal voluntary programs, such as Climate Leaders 

and U.S. Department of Energy’s Voluntary Reporting of 

Greenhouse Gases Program, collect some data elements (such 

as data related to NAICS codes) that are similar to the 

data that EPA will collect under this rule. However, none 

of the voluntary programs collect data from all of the 

facilities and suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 98. In 

addition, the voluntary programs that collect these data do 

not use the same definitions for data elements. 

U.S. Parent Company

Currently, three EPA programs collect parent company 

information: the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) under 

Section 313 of the Emergency Planning and Community Rightto-Know Act; Risk Management Plans under CAA section 

212(r); and the Inventory Update Rule under the Toxic 

Substances Control Act (TSCA). Of these three programs, 

TRI is the only one that requires reporters to submit 

information on their highest-level U.S. parent company7. 

TRI requires reporters to report the name of their one 

 

7 For purposes of TRI reporting, a reporter’s parent company is defined 

as the highest-level company located in the U.S. that directly owns at 

least 50 percent of the voting stock of the company. When a facility 

is owned by more than one company and none of the owners directly owns 

50 percent or more of the voting stock, the facility reports the name 

of either the facility operator or the owner with the largest ownership 

interest in the facility as its U.S. parent company. (Toxic Chemical 

Release Inventory Reporting Forms and Instructions, EPA 260-R-09-006, 

October 2009. page 34). 
Page 18 of 87 

parent company with the largest ownership interest in the 

facility. TRI also requires the parent company’s Dun & 

Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS)8

identifier to be reported annually. This amendment to 40 

CFR part 98 differs from TRI parent company reporting 

requirements in that it requires reporting of: 1) All 

parent companies, rather than just one parent company; 2) 

the physical address of each parent company, but not the 

DUNS identifier; and 3) the percentage of ownership 

interest for each parent company. EPA estimates that

approximately two-thirds of the reporters subject to 40 CFR 

part 98 are also required to report to TRI. 

Several EPA programs under the CAA, including the 

GHGRP9, require reporters to identify the “owner or 

operator” of each affected facility. Although in some 

cases, the owner or operator is also the highest-level U.S. 

parent company, the information currently collected under 

the majority of CAA programs is not designed to 

specifically identify the highest-level U.S. parent 

company, because that information is not necessary to 

determine compliance with particular regulatory 

requirements. 

 

8 The Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) is a unique 9-digit 

numerical identifier used to identify individual business entities in 

databases maintained by Dun & Bradstreet. 

9 GHGRP refers to the implementation of 40 CFR part 98. 
Page 19 of 87 

Primary and Other NAICS Codes

The final rule also requires facilities and suppliers 

reporting under 40 CFR part 98 to report their primary and 

all additional applicable NAICS codes.10 In the large 

majority of cases, facilities and suppliers will submit a 

single NAICS code. However, infrequently a 

facility/supplier may have two distinct 

products/activities/services providing comparable revenue. 

In these cases the facility/supplier may also report a 

second primary NAICS code. Among all EPA programs, only 

TRI requires reporters to submit primary NAICS codes as 

well as other relevant NAICS codes. As noted above, EPA 

estimates that approximately two-thirds of the reporters 

required to report under the GHGRP are also required to 

report to TRI. 

EPA collects some NAICS code information through 

routine compliance reporting in multiple programs11, but 

 

10 North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code(s) are 

defined as the six-digit code(s) that represents the 

product(s)/activity(s)/service(s) at a facility or supplier as listed 

in the Federal Register and defined in "North American Industrial 

Classification System Manual 2007," available from the U. S. Department 

of Commerce, National Technical Information Service. A reporter’s 

primary NAICS code is the NAICS code that most accurately describes the 

reporter’s primary product/activity/service based on revenue. 

Additional NAICS codes describe the product(s)/activity(s)/ service(s) 

at the facility that are not related to the principal source of 

revenue. 

11List of Programs Collecting NAICS: AIR Facility System (AFS); Facility 

Response Plan (FRP); Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS); 

National Emissions Inventory (NEI); National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System (NPDES); Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 
Page 20 of 87 

those programs either do not require primary and other 

NAICS codes be designated as such, or they do not define a 

primary NAICS code as it is defined in this rule. In 

addition, none of the compliance databases provide complete 

coverage of the facilities and suppliers subject to 40 CFR 

part 98. 

Cogeneration

There are currently no EPA programs that require 

facilities or suppliers to identify and report the use of 

cogeneration units located at the facility. EPA’s Combined 

Heat and Power Partnership, a voluntary program, requires 

that partners agree to provide data on existing 

cogeneration projects to help EPA determine climate 

benefits.12 However, this is a voluntary program and does 

not provide coverage of all cogeneration units. The Energy 

Information Administration collects information on 

cogeneration from utility and non-utility power generators 

greater than 1 megawatt13, but does not collect this 

information from all facilities and suppliers subject to 40 

CFR part 98. 

 

Information (RCRAInfo); Risk Management Plan (RMP); and Toxics Release 

Inventory System (TRIS). 

12 http://www.epa.gov/chp. 

13 Energy Information Agency-860, Annual Electric Generator Report 

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/eia860.html: and, 

Energy Information Agency-861, Annual Electric Power Industry Report 

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/eia861.html. 
Page 21 of 87 

2. Non-Federal Data Collection Programs

EPA reviewed State and other reporting initiatives or 

protocols to determine whether they contain information on 

U.S. parent companies, NAICS code(s), or cogeneration that 

is comparable in terms of coverage (of facilities and 

suppliers), and whether the specific information collected 

is comparable in data quality and timeliness to that 

required under this rule. EPA also considered whether the 

Agency had access to and could itself release the data 

collected under these programs. 

In general, the State and voluntary initiatives do not 

collect information on U.S. parent company, NAICS code(s), 

or cogeneration that is comparable to that required under 

this final rule regarding coverage (of facilities and 

suppliers), specific information collected, and data 

quality and timeliness. For additional information on the 

collection of parent company, NAICS codes, and cogeneration 

information by States, and other programs or initiatives, 

please see Section I.D. of the proposal preamble (75 FR 

18455) and the following memoranda “Review of Non-Federal 

Existing Greenhouse Gas Reporting Programs Requiring 

Reporting of Parent Company Ownership” and “Summary of 

Existing State Greenhouse Gas Reporting Programs,” located 

in Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0925. 
Page 22 of 87 

II. The Final Rule and Reponses to Public Comments 

This section of the preamble explains the requirements 

for the final rule, describes the major changes to the 

proposed rule, and summarizes the public comments and 

responses. 

A. U.S. Parent Company

In the proposed rule published on April 12, 2010 (75 

FR 18455), EPA defined United States parent company(s) as 

the highest-level United States company(s) with an 

ownership interest in the reporting entity as of December 

31 of the reporting year. Although the proposed rule 

language included the requirements for only one option, EPA 

proposed two options in the preamble for reporting U.S. 

parent company information. As proposed, Option 1 would 

require all facilities and suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 

98 to provide the legal name and physical address of their 

highest-level U.S. parent company. Reporters would then 

select the appropriate ownership status from a list of 

three types of ownership: 

“Single ownership” for entities owned by a single 

company that is itself not owned by another company. 

“Wholly owned” for entities owned by a single company 

that is itself owned by another company. 
Page 23 of 87 

“Multiple ownership” for entities owned by more than 

one company). 

Alternatively, in the proposed Option 2, reporters 

would provide the names and physical addresses of all of 

their U.S. parent companies and their respective 

percentages of ownership. 

1. Summary of U.S. Parent Company Reporting Requirements 

After considering all the comments received, EPA has 

selected Option 2. Option 2 requires reporters to report 

the name(s) and physical address(es) of all of their U.S. 

parent companies and their respective percentages of 

ownership. For the final rule, EPA has defined U.S. parent 

company(s) as highest-level U.S. company(s) with an 

ownership interest in the reporting entity as of December 

31 of the year for which data are being reported. The 

physical address of a U.S. parent company is defined as the 

street address, city, state and zip code of the U.S. parent 

company’s physical location. Table 2 of this preamble 

provides instructions for how facilities or suppliers 

should report based on various ownership structures. 
Page 24 of 87 

Table 2. Instructions for Reporting U.S. Parent Company(s) 

Reporting Scenario How to report U.S. parent company 

The reporting entity is 

entirely owned by a single 

U.S. company that is not 

owned by any other company 

(e.g., it is not a 

subsidiary or division of 

another company). 

Provide that company’s legal name and 

physical address as the U.S. parent 

company and report 100 percent 

ownership. 

The reporting entity is 

entirely owned by a single 

U.S. company which is, 

itself, owned by another 

company (e.g., it is a 

division or subsidiary of 

a higher-level company). 

Provide the legal name and physical 

address of the highest-level company 

in the ownership hierarchy as the 

U.S. parent company and report 100 

percent ownership. 

The reporting entity is 

owned by more than one 

U.S. company (e.g., 

company A owns 40 percent, 

company B owns 35 percent, 

and company C owns 25 

percent). 

Provide the legal names and physical 

addresses of all of the highest-level 

companies with an ownership interest 

as U.S. parent companies, and report 

the percent ownership of each 

company. 

The reporting entity is 

entirely owned by a 

foreign company. 

Provide the legal name and physical 

address of the foreign company’s 

highest-level company based in the 

U.S. as the U.S. parent company and 

report 100 percent ownership. 

The reporting entity is 

partially owned by a 

foreign company and 

partially owned by one or 

more U.S. companies. 

Provide the legal name and physical 

address of the foreign entity’s 

highest-level company based in the 

U.S., along with the legal names and 

physical addresses of the other U.S. 

parent companies, and report the 

percent ownership of each company. 

The reporting entity is 

owned by a joint venture 

or cooperative. 

The joint venture or cooperative is 

its own U.S. parent company. Provide 

the joint venture or cooperative’s 

legal name and physical address as 

the U.S. parent company and report 

100 percent ownership. 

The reporting entity is a 

federally owned facility. 

Enter U.S. Government, and do not 

report physical address or percent 

ownership.14

 

14 Federally owned facilities are not required to report percent 

ownership because all federally owned facilities are 100 percent owned 

by the Federal government. Additionally, the highest-level U.S. 

"parent" for federally owned facilities is the U.S. Government, and a 

physical address is not required to establish a unique identity for the 

U.S. Government. 
Page 25 of 87 

2. Summary of Major Changes since Proposal 

There are no major changes to the proposed rule for 

U.S. parent company reporting requirements for Option 2. 

That option requires facilities to report the name(s) and 

physical address(es) of all of their U.S. parent companies 

and their respective percentages of ownership. The 

rationale for the selection of Option 2 can be found in 

Section II.A.3 of this preamble. 

3. Summary of Public Comments and Responses

This section provides a summary of the comments and 

responses on EPA’s proposal to require reporting of U.S. 

parent company and ownership information. Also summarized 

in this section are public comments and responses on EPA’s 

consideration of reporting numeric identifiers for parent 

companies, in addition to parent company names. 

General Comments on Reporting of U.S. Parent Company and 

Ownership Information

Comments: One commenter noted that collecting 

corporate identifier information only from those facilities 

that emit 25,000 metric tons or more of CO2 per year would 

provide only a partial picture of a company’s overall 

emissions, as some companies may own facilities with 

emissions below the 25,000 metric ton threshold. This same 
Page 26 of 87 

commenter suggested that EPA should encourage company-level 

data reporting and require companies to report the relative 

emissions of each of their facilities subject to the 

reporting rule as compared to total company emissions. 

Response: Regarding the first issue, when EPA 

established the GHGRP last year, we completed a 

comprehensive threshold analysis and determined that a 

25,000 metric ton threshold generally suited the needs of 

the Agency by providing comprehensive coverage of emissions 

with a reasonable number of reporters, thereby creating the 

robust data set necessary for the quantitative analyses of 

the range of likely GHG policies, programs and regulations. 

For additional background on thresholds, please see Section 

II.E. of the preamble of the final Part 98 (74 FR 56271, 

October 30, 2009). We did not reopen that decision in the 

April 12, 2010 proposal to add U.S. parent company, NAICS 

codes, and cogeneration as data elements to the annual 

report required under 40 CFR 98.3. 

Regarding the second issue, EPA interprets the 

commenter’s remarks to indicate that companies, rather than 

individual facilities, should report emissions. This issue 

was also addressed when EPA established the GHGRP and was 

not revisited in the April 12, 2010 proposal. As described 

in Section II.F of the preamble of the final Part 98, the 
Page 27 of 87 

Agency elected to require reporting at the facility level 

in 40 CFR part 98 because the purpose of this rule is to 

collect data from suppliers and from facilities with direct 

GHG emissions above selected thresholds for use in 

analyzing, developing, and implementing current and 

potential future CAA GHG policies and programs. Facilitylevel data are needed to support analyses of some types of 

potential GHG reduction programs, such as New Source 

Performance Standards. Corporate-level reporting was not 

selected because corporate reporting without facilityspecific details would not provide sufficient data to 

assess many potential CAA GHG policies and programs. For 

additional discussion of the level of reporting, please see 

Section II.F of the preamble of the final Part 98 (74 FR 

56273, October 30, 2009). 

Moreover, as explained in the proposal and earlier in 

this preamble, EPA determined that reporting of all U.S. 

parent companies and their percent ownership will provide 

the Agency with necessary data to develop and improve 

emission inventories and to enhance EPA’s implementation of 

various nonregulatory programs aimed at encouraging 

voluntary reductions of GHG emissions. Requiring 

individual facilities to report how their emissions compare 

to the total emissions of their parent companies would be 
Page 28 of 87 

burdensome, because it would require each facility to 

obtain information from all the other facilities (including 

those located overseas) owned by their parent company(s) in 

order to make this type of comparison. EPA has concluded 

that the benefit of this information does not outweigh the 

additional burden to the regulated entity because the 

Agency and the public can compile similar information at a 

much lower burden by analyzing all GHG reports submitted by 

facilities with the same reported U.S. parent company. 

Furthermore, as stated above, the GHGRP is a facility and 

supplier level program designed to inform future programs 

and policies under the CAA. EPA does not consider a full 

corporate footprint analysis to be necessary to meet the 

goals of this program at this time. 

Comment: A commenter from the offshore operations 

sector requested that EPA clearly define the parent company 

reporting requirements specific to offshore petroleum and 

natural gas facilities. In particular, the commenter noted 

that while the offshore facility itself may have a single 

or multiple owners, each development and/or production 

field associated with the facility may have multiple 

owners. The commenter added that this situation could 

complicate the determination of percentage of ownership 

interest for each reporting entity. 
Page 29 of 87 

Response: Reporting entities (facilities or 

suppliers) are required to report information on their own 

parent company or companies, as described in Table 2 of 

this preamble. Parent company reporting is limited to 

information on the parents of the reporting entity itself, 

and does not include parent company information on any 

associated entities or customers that are not part of the 

reporting entity. The facility definition for an offshore 

petroleum/natural gas operator in the proposed 40 CFR part 

98, subpart W: Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems 

rulemaking (75 FR 18608, April 12, 2010) is limited to the 

offshore platform. Production fields and development 

fields that produce oil or gas sent to the platform are not 

considered part of the facility. Therefore, the facility 

reports the parent company or companies for the platform 

and secondary platform structures connected to the platform 

via walkways, storage tanks associated with the platform 

structure and floating production and offloading equipment, 

and does not include company information for any associated 

entities, such as production or development fields. 

To further clarify, the rule language was modified to 

include the phrase, “of the reporting entity” in paragraph 

98.3(c)(11), which requires that reporting entities report 

"Legal name(s) and physical address(es) of the highest-
Page 30 of 87 

level United States parent company(s) of the reporting 

entity and the percentage of ownership interest for each 

listed parent company as of December 31 of the year for 

which data are being reported...". 

EPA understands that operations at facilities in the 

oil and natural gas sector can be complex with many 

partners working together to explore for, produce, process, 

transport, and distribute oil and natural gas products. 

Given the commenter’s use of the term “owner”, EPA 

clarifies here that requirements to identify the “owner” of 

an affected facility are different from the requirements to 

report U.S. parent company. For example, “owner” refers to 

the person or legal entity that owns the facility and its 

productive infrastructure. Under this final rule, U.S. 

parent company means the highest-level U.S. company(s) with 

an ownership interest in the reporting entity. A regulated 

entity may report “owner” differently than U.S. parent 

company in some cases. For example, a facility may report 

“owner” and U.S. parent company differently if the legal 

entity that owns the facility is a subsidiary to a U.S. 

parent company. A facility may also report “owner” and U.S. 

parent company differently if an individual with no company 

affiliation has an ownership interest in a facility, since 

“owner” covers persons while U.S. parent company does not. 
Page 31 of 87 

Proposed Options 1 and 2. 

Proposed Options 1 and 2.

Comments: EPA received comments supporting both 

options. Comments favoring Option 1 (i.e., requiring 

reporting the legal name and physical address of the 

reporter’s highest-level U.S. parent company with the 

largest ownership share and the selection of the ownership 

type that best describes the ownership structure for the 

reporter), noted that Option 1 is the less burdensome 

option and questioned whether the potential benefits of 

Option 2 outweighed the burden of collecting the 

information. Furthermore, the comments stated that complex 

ownership structures make it unlikely the person completing 

the form would be able to provide the information on all 

parent companies. The comments also noted that identifying 

the general corporate structure (as proposed in Option 1) 

should provide the information required by EPA and that 

submission of the name of the highest-level U.S. company 

with the largest ownership interest is consistent with TRI 

reporting requirements. 

Commenters favoring Option 2 (i.e., requiring 

reporting of the legal names, physical addresses and 

respective percent ownership of all companies with an 

ownership stake in the regulated entity), noted that Option 
Page 32 of 87 

1 would overstate the GHG contribution of the largest 

ownership interest and omit the contribution of the smaller 

ownership interest(s). The commenters stated that this 

bias could limit the usefulness of the parent company data 

and that Option 2 provides a more complete picture of 

reporters’ ownership, thereby providing greater 

transparency regarding corporate GHG emissions. Some 

commenters added that Option 2 would be more effective in 

terms of corporate accountability. In addition, commenters 

noted that Option 2 complements recent Securities and 

Exchange Commission (SEC) Interpretive Guidance on certain 

existing disclosure rules that requires public companies to 

disclose the impact that climate change or regulation 

related to climate change may have on their business. An 

industry commenter stated that reporters should not have 

difficulty completing the reporting under either option. 

Response: After reviewing the comments received, EPA 

selected Option 2 because it provides more complete 

information on parent company ownership for reporters with 

multiple parent companies, thereby providing greater 

accuracy in aggregating emissions to the parent company 

level. 

EPA acknowledges that there is a modest additional 

burden associated with Option 2 for those reporters with 
Page 33 of 87 

multiple owners and that Option 1 would be the lower cost 

Option.15 The additional total national cost of Option 2 

however, was estimated to be less than two percent greater 

than Option 1. The burden estimate for Option 2 

incorporates the additional effort associated with 

reporters asking legal or management staff for information 

regarding complex ownership structure. Option 1 supporters 

neither offered supporting information or estimates of the 

additional burden nor refuted EPA’s burden estimates. EPA 

concluded that the additional benefits of Option 2 compared 

to Option 1 outweigh the potential costs of collecting more 

comprehensive parent company information because the 

additional cost of Option 2 is minimal while the additional 

benefit is substantial. 

Legal Authority to Collect Parent Company Information

Comments: Two commenters questioned the need for EPA 

to collect parent company information. One commenter 

stated that company affiliation should not be used as a 

factor in policy development. The other commenter’s 

primary objection was that EPA had been vague and nonspecific in justifying collection of parent company 

 

15 EPA’s estimate of the burden of Option 1 versus Option 2 was 

presented in the Economic Impact Analysis for the proposed rule. An 

updated estimate of the burden associated with Option 2 was included in 

the Economic Impact Analysis for the final rule. These documents are 

available at www.regulations.gov under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-

0925. 
Page 34 of 87 

information. The commenter stated that EPA’s authority to 

collect information under CAA section 114 is limited by the 

requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act (5 CFR 1320), 

under which EPA must demonstrate that the requested 

information has “practical utility.” The commenter stated 

that EPA had not met the definition of “practical utility” 

in its justification for collecting parent company 

information. The commenter added that because practical 

utility is necessary for the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) to grant an Information Collection Request 

(ICR), EPA should not finalize this requirement until it 

has identified and solicited comment on a practical use. 

Response: As explained in the Section I.C of this 

preamble, CAA section 114 is sufficiently broad for EPA to 

collect this information. Section 114 of the CAA generally 

authorizes EPA to gather information from any person who 

owns or operates an emissions source, who is subject to a 

requirement of the CAA, who manufacturers control or 

process equipment, or who the Administrator believes has 

information necessary for the purposes of CAA section 

114(a). EPA may gather information for purposes of 

establishing implementation plans or emissions standards, 

determining compliance, or “carrying out any provision” of 

the CAA. For these reasons, the Administrator may request 
Page 35 of 87 

that a person, on a one-time, periodic or continuous basis, 

establish and maintain records, make reports, install and 

operate monitoring equipment and, among other things, 

provide such information the Administrator may reasonably 

require. This language has been interpreted to grant EPA 

broad authority. See, e.g., Dow Chemical Co. v. U.S., 467 

U.S. 227, 233 (1986) (“Regulatory and enforcement authority 

generally carries with it all modes of inquiring and 

investigation traditionally employed or useful to execute 

the authority granted”). This information is included in 

the existing ICR. 

It is reasonable for EPA to request the parent company 

information. Once EPA has this information, EPA will be 

able to immediately use it to assist in implementation of 

agency policy and program goals including developing and 

improving emission inventories and enhancing the 

implementation of programs aimed at reducing emissions of 

GHGs. For more information, refer to Section I.C of this 

preamble, where EPA has further explained the immediate 

usefulness of this information under the CAA. 

Definition of U.S. Parent Company

The proposed rule included a definition of “United 

States parent company(s)” as follows: “United States parent 

company(s) means the highest-level United States company(s) 
Page 36 of 87 

with an ownership interest in the reporting entity as of 

December 31 of the reporting year.” 

Comment: One commenter requested that EPA clarify 

that “reporting year” means the year for which emissions 

data are being reported and not the year when the report is 

submitted to EPA. 

Response: The intent in the proposal was for 

“reporting year” to be interpreted as the year during which 

GHG data are monitored and collected. The language has 

been clarified in the final rule. The revised definition 

of U.S. parent company in the final rule reads: “United 

States parent company(s) means the highest-level United 

States company(s) with an ownership interest in the 

reporting entity as of December 31 of the year for which 

data are being reported.” 

Reporting by Foreign Owned Companies.

EPA solicited comments on whether facilities and 

suppliers owned by foreign companies always have a U.S.-

based parent company as defined in the proposed rule. EPA 

was interested in receiving comments, data, and analysis on 

whether there may be instances in which foreign-owned 

facilities and suppliers do not have a U.S. parent company 

because we wanted to determine if U.S. parent company 
Page 37 of 87 

reporting would be appropriate for all reporters subject to 

40 CFR part 98. 

No comments were received on this topic, but some 

minor clarifying changes were made in the final rule 

requirements for parent company reporting for foreign 

corporations. For consistency, some of these minor 

clarifying changed were also made in the final rule 

requirements for parent company reporting for multiple U.S. 

companies. In the final rule, if the reporting entity is 

entirely owned by a foreign company, reporters must provide 

the legal name and physical address of the foreign 

company’s highest-level company based in the U.S. as the 

U.S. parent company, and report 100 percent ownership. If 

the reporting entity is partially owned by a foreign 

company and partially owned by one or more U.S. companies, 

reporters provide the legal name and physical address of 

the foreign owner’s highest-level company based in the U.S. 

as the U.S. parent company, along with the legal names and 

physical addresses of the other U.S. parent companies and 

the percent ownership of each of these companies. 

Reporting of Numeric Corporate Identifiers.

In the preamble for the proposed rule, we discussed a 

requirement to report a numeric identifier for parent 

company(s) in addition to the parent company name. EPA 
Page 38 of 87 

requested comments on corporate identifiers and whether 

there are any additional numeric identifiers that should be 

considered for this final rule. Ultimately, EPA chose not 

to require reporting of a corporate numeric identifier, 

upon review of comments received and in recognition of the 

limitations of the possible private and public sources for 

such identifiers. 

Comments: Numerous comments stated that requiring a 

unique numeric identifier for each parent company would 

facilitate aggregation of the data and would achieve the 

most accurate reporter-to-parent linkages. These 

commenters noted that inconsistencies in reporting 

corporate parent names (“E.I. Du Pont De Nemours” versus 

“Du Pont Inc.”) increases the difficulty of the reporterto-parent aggregation and that numerical identifiers would 

increase the accuracy and consistency of the reported data. 

While commenters acknowledged the significant limitations 

in the numeric identifiers discussed in the preamble to the 

proposed rule, including Data Universal Number System 

(DUNS), Committee on Uniform Security Identification 

Procedures (CUSIPs), Federal Employer Identification 

Numbers (FEINs), and stock tickers, some commenters 

recommended using these identifiers, or using new, EPAgenerated identifiers. Commenters noted that using numeric 
Page 39 of 87 

identifiers could provide consistent and accurate reporting 

that minimizes the potential of data entry errors. Several 

comments supported EPA’s decision not to include a 

requirement to report numeric corporate identifiers because 

existing and available identifiers do not meet EPA’s 

objective of collecting comprehensive corporate identifier 

information for all facilities and suppliers subject to 40 

CFR part 98. 

Response: Based on a review of the comments received 

and on prior research, EPA decided to retain its position 

as stated in the proposal, and the final rule does not 

include reporting of a corporate identifier for the reasons 

described in this section of the preamble. 

EPA agrees with the comments that numeric identifiers 

could potentially facilitate data aggregation, however, the 

currently available numeric identifiers considered by EPA 

and proposed by commenters have shortcomings such that they 

would not enable EPA to adequately aggregate data. As 

noted in Section II.A of the preamble and in the memorandum 

“Summary of Existing Company Identifier System” (located in 

docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0925), some of the identifiers 

considered (e.g., stock tickers, CUSIP, SEC central index 

key, and LexisNexis) cover only public companies. EPA 

expects that reporters under the GHGRP will cover both 
Page 40 of 87 

public and privately-held companies and does not want to 

exclude a portion of reporters from Agency analyses. 

Furthermore, limiting the reporting of a numeric identifier 

to only public companies would place an additional burden 

on only this subset of reporters. The privately held 

databases, such as DUNS and CUSIPs, require licensing 

agreements, which potentially restrict the public use of 

that data. Finally, in accordance with Internal Revenue 

Code 6103, FEINs can only be collected and released on a 

voluntary basis and EPA would have no means to ensure that 

all facilities/suppliers would report their FEINs. 

Additionally, the final rule requires both the 

reporter’s parent company name and the parent company’s 

headquarters physical address, which is intended to improve 

considerably on EPA’s ability to uniquely identify 

corporate parents. To address comments related to 

difficulties in aggregating data using the reported parent 

company name, EPA plans to implement methods to standardize 

the parent company names reported. Standardizing the 

parent company names will improve the accuracy of 

aggregating data by parent company name by limiting human 

errors (e.g., typing entry errors), and removing 

inconsistent abbreviations (e.g., Co. vs. Company). 
Page 41 of 87 

In response to comments suggesting EPA assign new 

numeric identifiers to parent companies, that task is 

outside the scope of this rulemaking. However, the Agency 

is broadly exploring future development of unique, EPAgenerated numeric identifiers for parent companies. These 

comments reinforce EPA’s understands that such identifiers 

would be valuable for aggregating facility level data to 

the corporate level. Any development of these identifiers 

would be a future effort, and submission of such 

identifiers is not included in this final rule. 

B. NAICS Code(s) 

The proposed rulemaking (75 FR 18455) includes a 

requirement to report the primary NAICS code applicable to 

each reporter, as well as any additional NAICS codes in 

order of largest revenue to smallest. The proposal defined 

NAICS code as the six-digit code(s) that represents the 

product(s)/activity(s)/service(s) at a facility or supplier 

as defined in "North American Industrial Classification 

System Manual 2007," available from the U.S. Department of 

Commerce, National Technical Information Service. 

Inclusion of NAICS code reporting was proposed to 

provide information to assist EPA in aggregating and 

analyzing the data collected under 40 CFR part 98 at the 

sector level. 
Page 42 of 87 

1. Summary of NAICS Code Reporting Requirements

After considering all of the comments received, this 

final rule requires that each facility or supplier required 

to report under 40 CFR part 98 report its primary NAICS 

code and any additional applicable NAICS codes. For the 

purposes of this rule, EPA considers a reporter’s primary 

NAICS code to be the six-digit code (or codes) that most 

accurately describes the reporter’s primary 

product/activity/service, as defined in “North American 

Industry Classification System Manual 2007,” available from 

the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Technical 

Information Service.16 The primary NAICS code (or codes) is 

the product/activity/service that is the principal source 

of revenue for the facility or supplier. For the purposes 

of this rule, EPA considers additional NAICS codes to be 

those codes that describe the 

product(s)/activity(s)/service(s) at the facility, but that 

are not related to the principal source of revenue. 

The following instructions apply to reporters 

regarding the reporting of NAICS codes: Enter the six-

 

16 The Office of Management and Budget has proposed revisions to the 

North American Industry Classification System for 2012 onward. See 

“North American Industry Classification System - Updates for 2012" 75 

FR26855, May 12, 2010. These revisions will not affect this 

rulemaking, which requires reporters to use the NAICS codes defined in 

the North American Industry Classification System Manual 2007, 

regardless of whether these codes are updated in the future. 
Page 43 of 87 

digit NAICS code that most accurately describes the 

reporter’s principal product/activity/service and designate 

it as “primary.” Each reporter must provide one primary 

NAICS code, but may also designate a second code as primary 

if the reporter has two distinct 

products/activities/services providing comparable revenue. 

Provide all additional NAICS codes that describe the 

reporter’s products/ activities/services but that are not 

related to the principal source of revenue. Federal 

facilities should report the NAICS code that most closely 

represents the activities taking place at the site. For 

example, a Federally-owned, fossil fuel-fired electric 

power plant would be classified as NAICS 221112 — Fossil 

Fuel Electric Power Generation. For additional guidance on 

how to determine the proper NAICS code(s), go to 

http://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/. 

The use of the term “primary NAICS code” in this rule 

and the methodology for determining the primary NAICS code 

are consistent with the NAICS code use and methodology used 

by the U.S. Census Bureau and other government agencies. 

In addition, the instructions for reporting NAICS codes in 

the final rule are similar to those used by EPA’s TRI and 

other EPA information collections. 

2. Summary of Major Changes since Proposal 
Page 44 of 87 

The major changes since proposal are identified in the 

following list. The rationale for these changes can be 

found in Section II.B.3 of this preamble.. 

• In the final rule, reporters must provide one primary 

NAICS code and may also provide a second primary NAICS 

code if they have two distinct 

products/activities/services providing comparable 

revenue. The proposed rule did not specify the number 

of primary NAICS codes that should be reported. 

• In this final rule, no ordering of the additional 

(i.e., non-primary) NAICS codes is required. The 

proposed rule required that additional NAICS codes be 

entered in order of largest revenue to smallest. 

3. Summary of Public Comments and Responses

This section provides a summary of the comments and 

responses on EPA’s proposal to require reporting of primary 

and all additional NAICS codes by facilities and suppliers 

subject to 40 CFR part 98. 

Primary NAICS Code Reporting Requirements.

Comments: Many commenters supported the NAICS codes 

reporting requirements as proposed. Commenters stated that 

requiring the full six-digit NAICS code(s) will allow data 

users to connect reported GHG data with other information 

on U.S. industries, facilitating comparisons within and 

across industry sectors. Other commenters noted that 

collection of NAICS codes greatly expands the utility of 40 

CFR part 98 data, and provides important data relevant to 
Page 45 of 87 

industry sector analyses. One industry source added that 

NAICS codes are easily obtained. 

Two commenters requested that EPA allow reporting of 

more than one primary NAICS code. These commenters stated 

that this is particularly important for large facilities 

that consist of separate economic units, such as a 

petroleum refinery and a chemical plant. The commenters 

added that this could be important if any future climate 

change legislation differentiates regulatory requirements 

according to industry sector or NAICS codes, where 

requirements for refineries and chemical plants could 

differ. Accordingly, the commenters concluded, EPA should 

ensure that the final rule and any required electronic 

reporting tool allow for entering more than one primary 

NAICS code per reporter. 

Finally, one commenter stated that EPA should obtain 

primary NAICS codes from the Census Bureau. 

Response: EPA agrees with the commenters that the 

NAICS code information will provide a valuable data element 

for sector-level analyses. EPA considered using three- and 

four-digit NAICS codes, but proposed and is requiring 

reporting of the six-digit NAICS codes because they provide 

more detailed information for analyses. In addition, use 

of the six-digit NAICS codes is consistent with TRI and 
Page 46 of 87 

other EPA databases, allowing sector-level data to be 

compared across EPA data sets. 

Upon consideration of the comments received regarding 

multiple primary NAICS, EPA requires reporting in the final 

rule of one primary NAICS code that most accurately 

describes the reporting entity’s primary 

product/activity/service. A reporting entity that has two 

distinct products/activities/services providing comparable 

revenue may report a second primary NAICS code. Allowing a 

second NAICS code to be designated as a primary NAICS code 

gives facilities and suppliers that have two distinct lines 

of business with comparable revenue the ability to more 

accurately reflect the nature of their operations. 

In response to the commenters’ statement that the 

electronic reporting tool for the GHGRP should allow entry 

of more than one primary NAICS code per reporter, EPA’s 

reporting tool will require the reporters to designate one 

NAICS code as primary, and will allow up to two NAICS codes 

to be designated as primary. 

EPA also considered whether primary NAICS codes could 

be obtained from the Census Bureau, as suggested by one 

commenter. However, the facility-level Census Bureau data 
Page 47 of 87 

are confidential as specified in U.S. Code Title 1317, and 

cannot be accessed by EPA. Therefore, the final rule 

requires primary and all additional NAICS codes to be 

reported to EPA by the reporting entity. 

Additional NAICS Codes Reporting Requirements.

Comments: Several commenters opposed EPA’s proposal 

that the additional (i.e., non-primary) NAICS codes 

reported be listed in the order of the largest source of 

revenue to the smallest. Comments in opposition stated 

this ranking: 1) Would add an additional and unnecessary 

burden and expense; 2) does not add value to the emissions 

information being reported; 3) is an arbitrary exercise, 

where different companies, or different employees within a 

company, could derive different ranking of the additional 

NAICS codes; 4) is inconsistent with TRI requirements where 

non-primary NAICS codes are reported, but not ranked; and 

5) could disclose CBI that could be accessed by foreign or 

domestic competitors. One commenter suggested that 

reporting of NAICS codes beyond the primary NAICS codes 

should be voluntary. 

Response: EPA carefully considered the information 

provided by commenters on reporting additional (i.e., non-

 

17 U.S. Code Title 13 guarantees the confidentiality of census 

information and establishes penalties for disclosing this information. 

See http://www.census.gov/geo/www/luca2010/luca_title13.html. 
Page 48 of 87 

primary) NAICS codes in descending order based on revenue. 

As a result of this review, the final rule does not require 

that the additional NAICS codes be reported in a particular 

order. After reviewing the comments received, EPA agrees 

that ordering the additional NAICS codes by revenue could 

result in added burden that may not provide additional 

benefit compared to a list of additional NAICS codes that 

is not ordered, because emissions are not necessarily 

related to revenue. Ranking of additional NAICS codes, 

therefore, is not required in the final rule. The comments 

regarding the ranking of additional NAICS codes, including 

the possibility of different rankings by different 

employees, the need for consistency with TRI, and the 

possibility of divulging CBI are not addressed because EPA 

has determined that requiring ranking will not provide the 

Agency with useful additional data when compared to the 

burden. 

In response to the comment suggesting that reporting 

of additional NAICS codes be voluntary, EPA retains the 

proposed approach that requires mandatory reporting of all 

additional NAICS codes. To conduct analyses of the GHG 

emissions associated with different sectors or different 

types of operations, it is critical that these data be 

reported consistently among reporters. If reporting of 
Page 49 of 87 

additional (i.e., non-primary) NAICS were voluntary, it 

would not be possible to distinguish if a reporter entered 

only one NAICS code because only one type of operation is 

conducted, or if only one NAICS code was entered due to a 

voluntary decision not to enter additional NAICS codes. 

This inconsistency in reporting additional NAICS codes 

would limit the value of analyses characterizing nonprimary operations. To maintain the ability to conduct 

robust analyses using the reported NAICS codes, reporting 

of additional NAICS codes is required in the final rule. 

Definition of NAICS Codes.

In the proposed rule, EPA provided a definition for 

“North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) 

codes” as follows: “North American Industry Classification 

System (NAICS) code(s) means the six-digit code(s) that 

represents the product(s)/activity(s)/service(s) at a 

facility or supplier as defined in “North American 

Industrial Classification System Manual 2007,” available 

from the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Technical 

Information Service.” No comments were received on this 

definition, and no changes were made in the final rule to 

the definition of “North American Industry Classification 

System (NAICS) codes.” 

C. Cogeneration
Page 50 of 87 

In the proposed rulemaking (75 FR 18455), EPA proposed 

requirements for reporting the use of cogeneration by 

indicating (i.e., checking yes or no) whether some or all 

of the reported GHG emissions are from one or more 

cogeneration units. EPA also solicited comment on whether 

this reporting should be mandatory or voluntary. In the 

proposal, EPA defined a cogeneration unit as a unit that 

produces electrical energy and useful thermal energy for 

industrial, commercial, or heating or cooling purposes, 

through the sequential or simultaneous use of the original 

fuel energy. 

1. Summary of Cogeneration Reporting Requirements

The final rule requires reporters to indicate whether 

reported emissions include emissions from a cogeneration 

unit (yes or no) located at the facility. Cogeneration 

units can result in net reductions (i.e., across 

facilities) of GHG emissions compared to separate power and 

heat generation. 

Information on the types and characteristics of 

facilities that employ cogeneration technologies and the 

performance of cogeneration units could be important to 

future development of GHG mitigation strategies. EPA 

recognizes that the information required under this rule 

may not, by itself, be sufficient to determine the actual 
Page 51 of 87 

quantity of GHG emissions occurring from cogeneration units 

at individual reporting facilities, companies or NAICS 

sectors. It also does not provide the degree to which 

those cogeneration emissions displace fossil fuel or other 

fuel source emissions from central station generation 

plants. However, the information reported will allow EPA 

and States to identify facilities using cogeneration. In 

addition, EPA recognizes that not all emissions at 

individual reporting facilities with cogeneration are 

attributable to the cogeneration unit(s). As such, it 

should not be inferred that all emissions at an individual 

reporting facility with cogeneration are attributed to the 

cogeneration unit(s). 

2. Summary of Major Changes Since Proposal 

The final rule retains the proposed rule language and 

requires reporters to indicate whether reported emissions 

include emissions from a cogeneration unit. Reporting of 

this information is mandatory. 

3. Summary of Public Comments and Responses

This section provides a summary of the comments and 

responses on EPA’s proposal to require reporters to 

identify use of a cogeneration unit located at the 

facility. 

Cogeneration Reporting Requirements.
Page 52 of 87 

Comments: Numerous comments strongly supported EPA’s 

proposal to require reporters to indicate whether some or 

all of the reported GHG emissions are from a cogeneration 

unit. Commenters stated that collecting the information on 

cogeneration use will help EPA understand where the 

practice is being used, and how to encourage its use where 

appropriate. None of the comments opposed EPA’s proposal 

to collect cogeneration information. 

One commenter requested that EPA provide in the rule 

additional discussion of the benefits of cogeneration 

technology as an efficient method to reduce net GHG 

emissions. This commenter also requested that EPA require 

power production facilities to report GHG emissions on a 

net GHG per usable energy produced basis to ensure that the 

benefits of total system efficiency are recognized. 

Another commenter recommended EPA consider whether 

additional information on cogeneration units should be 

required in the future, such as their capacity or how 

frequently they are used. 

Finally, a commenter recommended that EPA clarify 

and/or modify the rule to state that: (1) Local 

Distribution Companies (LDCs) should be required to report 

only the presence of cogeneration units at facilities owned 

and operated by the LDC; and (2) as suppliers, LDCs are not 
Page 53 of 87 

responsible for reporting cogeneration units owned and 

operated by the LDC’s individual customers. 

Response: EPA agrees with comments that the 

cogeneration information will be informative, enabling EPA 

to identify the types and characteristics of facilities 

that employ cogeneration technologies. By collecting this 

information annually, EPA will also be able to track 

changes in the use of this technology in individual sectors 

and across the U.S. economy. 

EPA agrees with the comment that there are 

efficiencies related to the use of cogeneration. However, 

the regulatory framework for the GHGRP is not the 

appropriate place to describe the benefits of a technology. 

In response to the comment requesting that power 

production facilities report GHG emissions on a net GHG per 

usable energy produced, the information the commenter asks 

EPA to collect is well beyond the intended scope of this 

rule. The scope of this rule is to obtain general 

information on cogeneration use for future development of 

GHG mitigation strategies and not to support the 

development of standards of performance for industrial 

facilities or to amend the units in which data are required 

to be reported in 40 CFR part 98. 
Page 54 of 87 

In response to the comments requesting EPA collect 

more detailed information on reporters’ cogeneration units, 

EPA recognizes that the information required under this 

rule will not, by itself, be sufficient to determine the 

actual quantity of GHG emissions occurring from 

cogeneration units at individual reporting facilities, 

companies or NAICS sectors. The cogeneration information 

required under the final rule will improve EPA’s 

understanding of the current implementation of cogeneration 

while minimizing burden on reporters; therefore, EPA is not 

currently exploring expansion of the cogeneration reporting 

requirements. 

EPA agrees with the comment regarding the requirements 

for LDCs to report cogeneration. It was not our intent to 

require LDCs to collect cogeneration information on their 

customers. EPA is clarifying in this response that LDCs 

are required to report the presence of cogeneration 

facilities owned and operated by the LDC, but are not 

required to report whether units owned and operated by the 

LDC’s customers have cogeneration units. 

Comments on Making Cogeneration Reporting Voluntary.

EPA requested comments on whether the cogeneration 

reporting in the final rule should be mandatory or 

voluntary. No comments supported voluntary reporting of 
Page 55 of 87 

the cogeneration information; however, many commenters 

stated their support for EPA’s proposal to require that 

reporters indicate whether or not any of their reported 

emissions are from a cogeneration unit at the facility. As 

in the proposed rule, the final rule includes mandatory 

reporting to indicate if any reported emissions are from 

cogeneration units located at the facility. 

Definition of Cogeneration.

The proposed rule included a definition of 

“cogeneration unit” as follows: “Cogeneration unit means a 

unit that produces electrical energy and useful thermal 

energy for industrial, commercial, or heating or cooling 

purposes, through the sequential or simultaneous use of the 

original fuel energy.” EPA based this definition of 

cogeneration on the Agency’s Acid Rain Program to promote 

consistency and comparable data collection across EPA 

regulatory programs. No comments were received on this 

definition, and no changes were made in the final rule to 

the definition of “cogeneration” included in the proposed 

rule. 

D. Frequency of Reporting

In the proposed rulemaking (75 FR 18455), EPA proposed 

that facilities and suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 98 be 

required to submit information regarding their U.S. parent 
Page 56 of 87 

company(s), their NAICS code(s), and whether or not any of 

their reported emissions are from a cogeneration unit, on 

an annual basis, as part of their annual reports. EPA 

further proposed that regulated entities be required to 

report this information as it exists on December 31 of the 

year for which data are being reported, to be consistent 

with other EPA reporting programs, such as TRI. 

1. Summary of the Final Rule Requirements

Under the final rule, facilities and suppliers subject 

to 40 CFR part 98 are required to annually submit 

information regarding their U.S. parent company(s), their 

NAICS code(s), and whether or not any of their reported 

emissions are from a cogeneration unit, as part of their 

annual GHG reporting. Regulated entities report this 

information as it exists on December 31 of the year for 

which data are being reported. Facilities will be required 

to report this data beginning in 2011 for the 2010 

reporting year. 

2. Summary of Major Changes Since Proposal 

There have been no changes since proposal. 

3. Summary of Public Comments and Responses

This section provides a summary of the comments and 

responses on EPA’s proposal to require annual reporting for 

the data elements added to 40 CFR part 98 in the final rule 
Page 57 of 87 

(i.e., U.S. parent company(s), NAICS code(s), and 

cogeneration by facilities and suppliers). While EPA was 

interested in receiving comments on the proposal in its 

entirety, EPA specifically solicited comments on the 

utility and burden of updating the additional information 

required by the proposed rule on a more frequent basis than 

annually, for example, whenever changes occur with respect 

to a reporter’s U.S. parent company or NAICS code(s). 

Comments: The comments received largely supported 

EPA’s proposal to require reporting of U.S. parent 

company(s), NAICS code(s), and cogeneration units on an 

annual basis, rather than more frequently. One commenter 

supporting annual reporting stated a concern with the 

potential burden and complexity of updating corporate 

parent information more often than annually. For more 

frequent reporting, the commenter added, EPA would need to 

identify a specific need for the increased level of detail. 

One commenter noted that if reporting were required 

quarterly, data could be aggregated to each parent 

company’s fiscal year. Another commenter stated that 

requiring updates to be reported whenever a change occurs 

in the reporter’s parent company or NAICS code should not 

be a problem. This commenter added that the annual 

reporting requirement, however, may be sufficient. 
Page 58 of 87 

Response: EPA recognizes that a reporter’s U.S. 

parent company(s) and/or NAICS code(s) may change during 

the course of the year. In some instances this information 

may even change multiple times throughout the year. 

However, EPA agrees with the commenters that requiring 

updates to these data elements more than once a year, such 

as every time there is a change in a reporter’s U.S. parent 

company(s) or NAICS code(s), would result in an increased 

burden for minimal additional information. In addition, 

requiring annual reporting would be consistent with the 

requirements of 40 CFR part 98. Therefore, the final rule 

requires annual reporting of reporters’ U.S. parent 

company(s), NAICS code(s), and whether or not any of their 

reported emissions are from a cogeneration unit, as part of 

their regularly scheduled annual reports, as proposed. 

More frequent reporting, such as when a change in parent 

company or NAICS occurs, is not required. 

E. Applicability of the Reporting Requirements 

1. Summary of Applicability of the Reporting Requirements 

The final rule applies to all reporters; it requires 

all facilities and suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 98 to 

report the additional information included in this rule. 

The descriptions of the terms “primary NAICS code(s),” and 

“additional NAICS code(s),” and the definitions of “United 
Page 59 of 87 

States parent company” and “cogeneration unit” in the final 

rule apply only to this rule, which adds these data 

elements to the list of items that must be reported under 

40 CFR 98.3(c). The definitions and descriptions of terms 

in this final rule do not change the applicability of any 

subpart in the promulgated 40 CFR part 98. They also do 

not change the level of reporting or who is required to 

submit reports. 

The definition of United States parent company does 

not override or change the meaning of similar terms that 

refer to company level or corporate level requirements. 

Many subparts (including 40 CFR part 98, subparts A, C, G, 

K, P, Q, R, Y, GG, and HH) use the term “company records,” 

which is defined in 40 CFR part 98, subpart A. The term 

“corporate level” is used in 40 CFR part 98, subpart MM to 

require importers and exporters to report at the corporate 

level, rather than the facility level. “Corporate 

documents” are referred to in 40 CFR part 98, subpart A. 

None of these terms, definitions, or associated 

requirements are affected by the definition of “United 

States parent company” in the final rule. 

In addition, the definition of United States parent 

company in the final rule does not affect the definitions 

of “importer” and “exporter” in 40 CFR part 98, subpart A, 
Page 60 of 87 

or the applicability of the suppliers source categories. 

The definition in the final rule also does not affect the 

term “local distribution company” as described in 40 CFR 

part 98, subpart NN. These terms retain their meaning in 

40 CFR part 98. 

2. Summary of Major Changes Since Proposal 

There have been no changes since the proposal. 

3. Summary of Public Comments and Responses

No comments were received on the applicability of the 

reporting requirements. 

F. Miscellaneous Public Comments and Responses 

EPA also received comments of a more general nature 

that did not relate specifically to reporting of parent 

company, NAICS codes, cogeneration, frequency of reporting, 

or applicability. These comments and EPA’s responses are 

summarized in this section. 

Comments: Two commenters voiced general support for 

this rule. The commenters asserted that the inclusion of 

the requirements to report NAICS codes and corporate 

information will enable researchers to conduct analyses of 

corporate GHG emissions. Another commenter voiced 

opposition to the rule, stating that the government already 

has enough rules and regulations.
Page 61 of 87 

Response: EPA thanks the commenters for their input. 

The focus of this rule is to collect accurate data on U.S. 

GHGs from suppliers and facilities above specified 

thresholds for use in analyzing and developing potential 

GHG policies and environmental programs. This rule will 

help EPA carry out its duties under the CAA while adding a 

very minimal burden to reporting entities. 

Comment: One commenter requested that EPA make the 

information collected under this rule available to the 

public and easily accessible to all interested parties. 

Response: EPA published a proposed confidentiality 

determination on July 7, 2010 (75 FR 39094), which 

addressed the confidentiality of data reported under 40 CFR 

part 98. In that action, EPA proposed which specific data 

elements would be treated as CBI and which data elements 

must be available to the public under CAA section 114. EPA 

has received several comments on the proposal, and is in 

the process of considering these comments. A final 

determination will be issued before any data are released, 

and data that are not determined to be confidential will be 

published in a way that will be easily accessible to the 

public. 

Comment: One commenter suggested that EPA should 

develop a comprehensive company-level GHG inventory. 
Page 62 of 87 

Response: While the development of a comprehensive 

company-level GHG inventory is outside the scope of this 

rulemaking, EPA notes the commenter’s suggestion and thanks 

the commenter for their input. For a discussion of why EPA 

chose to require facility-level reporting, please see 

Section II.F of the preamble of the final Part 98 (74 FR 

56273, October 30, 2009) as well as Section II.A of the 

preamble to this final rule. For a discussion of why EPA 

chose a 25,000 metric ton CO2e reporting threshold for most 

sources, please see Section II.E. of the preamble of the 

final Part 98 (74 FR 56271, October 30, 2009) as well as 

Section II.A of the preamble to this final rule. 

G. Correction to subpart A.

We also are correcting a drafting error in the 

revision to 40 CFR 98.2(a)(2) that was published on July 

12, 2010 (75 FR 39758). In the July 12, 2010 notice, we 

restructured 40 CFR 98.2(a) to move the lists of source 

categories that are subject to the rule from the text into 

tables. This restructuring revision made no substantive 

change to the applicability provisions of the rule, but 

just reformatted that section of the rule to better 

accommodate the addition of new source categories for which 

reporting would become effective in future years. To make 

this change required conforming changes to the text of 40 
Page 63 of 87 

CFR 98.2(a) to refer to the tables. The July 12, 2010 

change to 40 CFR 98.2(a)(2) reads that the rule applies to: 

“A facility that contains any source category that is 

listed in Table A-4 of this subpart that emits 25,000 

metric tons CO2e or more per year in combined emissions from 

stationary fuel combustion units, miscellaneous uses of 

carbonate, and all applicable source categories that are 

listed in Table A-3 and Table A-4 of this subpart.” 

The published clause inadvertently omitted the word 

“and” prior to the clause “...that emits 25,000 metric tons 

CO2e...” Despite this omission, the regulatory text as it 

appears in the July 12, 2010 final rule can and should be 

interpreted to apply to a facility that contains any source 

category listed in Table A-4 of this subpart if combined 

emissions from all applicable source categories at the 

facility are 25,000 metric tons CO2e per year or more. 

Nonetheless, restoring the inadvertently omitted word “and” 

to the paragraph makes it absolutely clear that the 25,000 

metric tons CO2e threshold applies at the facility level and 

not at the source category level. This interpretation is 

clear from the original rule and from the preamble to the 

proposal for the subpart A restructuring (75 FR 12451 and 

75 FR 12489) and the preamble to the final rule for the 

restructuring (75 FR 39739). As published, 40 CFR 
Page 64 of 87 

98.2(a)(2) is technically correct, but reinserting the 

“and” makes it clearer and less subject to 

misinterpretation, and makes the sentence structure 

parallel to that of the original rule text. Therefore, we 

are revising 40 CFR 98.2(a)(2) by restoring the word “and” 

to read as follows (emphasis added): 

“A facility that contains any source category that is 

listed in Table A-4 of this subpart and that emits 25,000 

metric tons CO2e or more per year in combined emissions from 

stationary fuel combustion units, miscellaneous uses of 

carbonate, and all applicable source categories that are 

listed in Table A-3 and Table A-4 of this subpart.” 

III. Economic Impacts of the Final Rule 

This section of the preamble examines the costs and 

economic impacts of the final rulemaking and the estimated 

economic impacts of the rule on affected entities, 

including estimated impacts on small entities. Complete 

detail on the economic impacts of the final rule can be 

found in the text of the Economic Impact Analysis (EIA) for 

the final rule (located in docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0925). 

A. How were compliance costs estimated?

1. Summary of Method Used to Estimate Compliance Costs 

The cost analysis estimates the incremental 

contributions to total reporting burden expected under 40 
Page 65 of 87 

CFR part 98 and compliance costs associated with reporting 

the data elements described above. EPA estimated 

compliance costs based on the time reporters spend meeting 

the requirements and the associated labor wage rates. 

EPA’s estimated costs of compliance are discussed in this 

section of the preamble and in greater detail in Section 4 

of the EIA. 

Labor Costs. All of the reporting cost estimates 

include the time of managers, lawyers, and technical staff 

in both the private sector and the public sector. To 

reflect that both management and technical staff will be 

involved in reporting the above data elements, an overall 

blended wage rate was developed based on estimates from the 

TRI program for similar data element reporting at similar 

facilities. Management staff is estimated to be involved 

in approximately 0.8 percent of the reporting, while 

technical staff is likely to be needed for the remaining 

99.2 percent. Thus, the blended wage rate used in this 

analysis is $60.22 per hour. The amount of time required 

for facilities with one owner is 80 minutes per facility in 

the first year and 40 minutes per facility in subsequent 

years; time estimated for facilities with more than one 

owner is 125 minutes per facility in the first year and 85 

minutes per facility in subsequent years. 
Page 66 of 87 

Cost basis. The cost analysis is based on facilities 

and suppliers currently subject to 40 CFR part 98, 

including subparts that were finalized after EPA proposed 

the rule to require reporting of corporate parent 

information, NAICS codes and cogeneration.18 Specifically, 

the finalization of 40 CFR part 98, subparts T (Magnesium 

Production), FF (Underground Coal Mines), TT (Industrial 

Waste Landfills), and II (Industrial Wastewater Treatment) 

resulted in a higher number of facilities and suppliers 

subject to this final rule. The analysis does not account 

for those expected to be added to 40 CFR part 98 through 

upcoming actions. The methods and assumptions used to 

estimate the compliance costs for facilities and suppliers 

currently subject to the rule would likewise apply to those 

facilities and suppliers that may be added to the 40 CFR 

part 98 reporting program in the future. The addition of 

new facilities or suppliers would therefore increase the 

total compliance costs in proportion to the increase of the 

reporting universe. Accordingly, EPA does not expect the 

burden for newly added industries to change the conclusions 

of this economic analysis. 

B. What are the costs of the rule?

 

18 See Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases from Magnesium 

Production, Underground Coal Mines, Industrial Wastewater Treatment, 

and Industrial Waste Landfills; Final Rule (75 FR 39736, July 12, 

2010). 
Page 67 of 87 

1. Summary of Costs

As shown in Table 3 of this preamble, the total 

national cost under this final rule is approximately 

$944,000 in the first year and about $470,000 in subsequent 

years (all estimates are in $2006). Costs include a public 

sector burden estimate of $90,000 in the first year and 

$40,000 in subsequent years for program implementation and 

data verification activities. See Table 3 in Section IV.A 

of this preamble for a summary of the costs. 

C. What are the economic impacts of the rule?

1. Summary of Economic Impacts

EPA prepared an economic analysis to evaluate the 

impacts of the final rule. The analysis estimates the 

private direct compliance costs per facility and provides a 

national burden estimate, which includes public costs 

associated with program implementation and verification 

activities. Reporting costs were estimated to be less than 

$100 per facility. As a result, the rule is unlikely to 

result in significant changes in firms’ production 

decisions or economic choices. 

D. What are the impacts of the rule on small businesses?

1. Summary of Impacts on Small Businesses

As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

and the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 
Page 68 of 87 

(SBREFA), EPA assessed the potential impacts of the rule on 

small entities (small businesses, governments, and nonprofit organizations). (See Section IV.C of this preamble 

for definitions of small entities.) 

EPA conducted a screening assessment comparing 

compliance costs for affected industry sectors to industryspecific receipts data for establishments owned by small 

businesses. This ratio constitutes a “sales” test that 

computes the annualized compliance costs of this rule as a 

percentage of sales and determines whether the ratio 

exceeds some level (e.g., 1 percent or 3 percent). 

The average ratio of annualized reporting program 

costs to revenues of small entities would be less than 0.01 

percent. As a result, EPA has concluded that this action 

will not have a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

This action is not a "significant regulatory action" 

under the terms of Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and is therefore not subject to review 

under the EO. 

Although this is not a significant economic rule, EPA 

prepared an analysis of the potential costs and benefits 
Page 69 of 87 

associated with the final rule to provide insights on the 

potential effects. This analysis is contained in the 

Economic Impact Analysis. A copy of the analysis is 

available in the docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0925) for this 

action and is briefly summarized here. In the economic 

analysis, EPA identified the final rule’s compliance burden 

and the costs. The cost analysis, presented in Section 

III.B of this preamble, estimates the total annualized 

burden, which is presented in Table 3 of this preamble. 

Table 3. Cost Summary under the Final Rulemaking (in 

thousands, $2006). 

Cost Year 1 Subsequent years 

National compliance $854 $430 

Public $90 $40 

Total $944 $470 

Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding. 

Overall, EPA has concluded that the costs of 

collecting U.S. parent company(s), NAICS codes, and 

cogeneration information as part of 40 CFR part 98 are 

outweighed by the potential benefits of more comprehensive 

information about GHG emissions. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

The information collection requirements for this final 

rule have been submitted for approval to OMB under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. An ICR 

document was previously prepared for 40 CFR part 98 and was 
Page 70 of 87 

assigned EPA ICR number 2300.03. The information 

collection requirements of this amendment to 40 CFR part 98 

are documented in an additional ICR document, which was 

assigned EPA ICR number 2374.02. 

The data collected through this final rule would be 

immediately available to EPA and could be used for the 

purposes of providing additional information to support 

more effective research and develop actions to address GHG 

emissions. For example, corporate parent and NAICS data 

would assist EPA in developing and improving emission 

inventories, as well as characterizing emissions data in 

several different ways. A more detailed understanding of 

the sources and operational categories of GHG emissions 

could lead to improvements in air pollution emissions 

information that is relied upon to develop effective 

control strategies. For example, EPA could use the NAICS 

code information gathered by this rule to compare results 

both within industries and across industry sectors. 

In addition, the information gathered through this 

rule will be immediately available to enhance EPA’s 

implementation of various nonregulatory programs aimed at 

encouraging voluntary reductions of GHG emissions. Under 

the authority of CAA section 103, EPA has launched a 

variety of nonregulatory programs aimed at reducing 
Page 71 of 87 

emissions of GHGs. The additional data will assist EPA by 

providing more detailed information on possible sources, 

and facility operations within industrial sectors for EPA 

to work with in the context of these programs. 

This information collection is mandatory and will be 

carried out under CAA section 114. EPA published a 

proposed confidentiality determination on July 7, 2010 (75 

FR 39094) that specified which data reporting elements in 

40 CFR part 98 would be treated as CBI and which data 

elements must be available to the public under CAA section 

114. A final determination will be issued before any part 

98 data are released. 

As outlined in ICR number 2374.02, the projected 

average annual cost and hour burden for non-Federal 

respondents is about $571,000 and 9,500 hours. The 

estimated average annual burden per response is 0.15 hour; 

the frequency of response is annual for all respondents 

that must comply with the final rule; and the estimated 

average number of likely respondents per year is 10,551. 

The cost burden to respondents resulting from the 

collection of information includes the total capital cost 

annualized over the equipment’s expected useful life 

(averaging $0), a total operation and maintenance component 

(averaging $0 per year), and a labor cost component 
Page 72 of 87 

(averaging $571,000). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 

1320.3(b). These cost numbers differ from those shown 

elsewhere in the EIA (EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0925) because ICR 

costs represent the average cost over the first three years 

of the rule, whereas the EIA reports costs separately for 

the first and subsequent years of the rule. Also, the 

total cost estimate of the rule in the EIA includes the 

cost to the Agency to administer the program. The ICR 

differentiates between respondent burden and cost to the 

Agency. 

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is 

not required to respond to, a collection of information 

unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. 

The OMB control numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40 CFR are 

listed in 40 CFR part 9. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally 

requires an agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility 

analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment 

requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any 

other statute, unless the agency certifies that the rule 

will not have a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. Small entities 
Page 73 of 87 

include small businesses, small organizations, and small 

governmental jurisdictions. 

For purposes of assessing the impacts of the final 

rule on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A 

small business as defined by the Small Business 

Administration’s regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a small 

governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, 

county, town, school district or special district with a 

population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small 

organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is 

independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its 

field. 

After considering the economic impacts of the final 

rule on small entities, I certify that this action will not 

have a significant economic impact on a substantial number 

of small entities. The additional per-entity costs under 

the final rule are substantially smaller (less than $81 in 

year 1 and $41 in subsequent years) than the burden for the 

overall rule. The costs are therefore not enough to 

constitute a significant economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. The small entities directly 

regulated by the final rule include small businesses across 

all sectors encompassed by the rule, small governmental 

jurisdictions and small non-profits. We have determined 
Page 74 of 87 

that some small businesses will be affected because their 

production processes emit GHGs that must be reported, or 

because they have stationary combustion units on site that 

emit GHGs that must be reported. Small governments and 

small non-profits are generally affected because they have 

regulated landfills or stationary combustion units on site, 

or because they own a local distribution company subject to 

40 CFR part 98, subpart NN (natural gas suppliers). 

At promulgation of 40 CFR part 98, EPA examined the 

impact on small entities (74 FR 56369, October 30, 2009). 

In addition, EPA described the steps taken by EPA to reduce 

the impact of 40 CFR part 98 on small entities. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, requires Federal agencies, 

unless otherwise prohibited by law, to assess the effects 

of their regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal 

governments and the private sector. Federal agencies must 

also develop a plan to provide notice to small governments 

that might be significantly or uniquely affected by any 

regulatory requirements. The plan must enable officials of 

affected small governments to have meaningful and timely 

input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with 

significant Federal intergovernmental mandates and must 
Page 75 of 87 

inform, educate, and advise small governments on compliance 

with the regulatory requirements. 

The final rule does not contain a Federal mandate that 

may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for 

State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or 

the private sector in any one year. As shown in the EIA 

(EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0925), EPA estimated the several national 

cost estimates and found annual expenditures were below 

$100 million threshold. Thus, the final rule is not 

subject to the requirements of UMRA sections 202 or 205. 

The final rule is also not subject to the requirements 

of UMRA section 203 because it contains no regulatory 

requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect 

small governments. The final new rule requires facilities 

and suppliers already subject to 40 CFR part 98 to provide 

additional data in each annual GHG report, and the 

additional data elements required are the same for all 

reporters (private and public). In addition, EPA’s small 

entity analysis shows the average ratio of annualized 

reporting program costs to revenues would be less than 0.01 

percent. 

This final rule amends 40 CFR part 98 and applies 

directly to reporters that supply fuel or industrial gases 

that when used emit GHGs, and to reporters that directly 
Page 76 of 87 

emit GHGs. The final rule does not apply to governmental 

entities unless the government entity owns a facility that 

directly emits GHGs above threshold levels such as a 

landfill or large stationary combustion source. In 

addition, the final rule does not impose any implementation 

responsibilities on State, local, or Tribal governments and 

it is not expected to increase the cost of existing 

regulatory programs managed by those governments. Thus, 

the impacts on governments affected by the final rule are 

expected to be minimal. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

This action does not have federalism implications. It 

will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on 

the relationship between the national government and the 

States, or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various levels of government, as 

specified in EO 13132. However, for a more detailed 

discussion about how 40 CFR part 98 relates to existing 

State programs, please see Section II of the preamble to 

the final Part 98 (74 FR 56266, October 30, 2009). 

This final rule applies directly to reporters that 

supply fuel or chemicals that when used emit GHGs or 

facilities that directly emit GHGs. It does not apply to 

governmental entities unless the government entity owns a 
Page 77 of 87 

facility that directly emits GHGs above threshold levels 

such as a landfill or large stationary combustion source, 

so relatively few government facilities would be affected. 

This final rule also does not limit the power of States or 

localities to collect GHG data and/or regulate GHG 

emissions. Thus, EO 13132 does not apply to this action. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments

This final rule is not expected to have Tribal 

implications, as specified in EO 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000). The final rule applies directly to 

entities that supply fuel or chemicals that when used emit 

GHGs or facilities that directly emit GHGs. This final 

rule does not pose significant costs on either a per-entity 

or national basis; few, if any, facilities or suppliers 

that are expected to be affected by the final rule are 

anticipated to be owned by Tribal governments. This final 

rule also does not limit the power of Tribes to collect GHG 

data and/or regulate GHG emissions. Thus, EO 13175 does 

not apply to the final rule. 

Although EO 13175 does not apply to this final rule, 

EPA sought opportunities to provide information to Tribal 

governments and representatives during development of the 
Page 78 of 87 

rule, as documented in the preamble to the promulgated 

final Part 98 (74 FR 56371). 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) 

as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern 

health or safety risks, such that the analysis required 

under section 5-501 of the EO has the potential to 

influence the regulation. This action is not subject to EO 

13045 because it does not establish an environmental 

standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that Significantly 

Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

This action is not subject to EO 13211 (66 FR 28355 

(May 22, 2001)), because it is not a significant regulatory 

action under EO 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law No. 104-113 (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so 

would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 

standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, 
Page 79 of 87 

sampling procedures, and business practices) that are 

developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards 

bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through 

OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use 

available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. 

This final rule does not involve technical standards. 

Therefore, EPA is not considering the use of any voluntary 

consensus standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and LowIncome Populations

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) 

establishes Federal executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs Federal agencies, to 

the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their mission by 

identifying and addressing, as appropriate, 

disproportionately high and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, policies, and 

activities on minority populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

EPA has determined that this final rule will not have 

disproportionately high and adverse human health or 

environmental effects on minority or low-income populations 
Page 80 of 87 

because it does not affect the level of protection provided 

to human health or the environment. The final rule does 

not affect the level of protection provided to human health 

or the environment because it addresses information 

collection and reporting. 

K. Congressional Review Act

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as 

added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness 

Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take 

effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule 

report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of 

the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United 

States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and 

other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. 

House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of 

the United States prior to publication of the rule in the 

Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 

days after it is published in the Federal Register. This 

action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

This rule will be effective [INSERT THE DATE 60 DAYS AFTER 

PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. 
Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases 

Page 81 of 87 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 98

Environmental protection, Administrative practice and 

procedure, Greenhouse gases, Suppliers, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: 

Lisa P. Jackson, 

Administrator. 
Page 82 of 87 

For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, 

chapter I, of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended to 

read as follows: 

PART 98—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 98 continues to 

read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq. 

Subpart A—[Amended] 

2. Section 98.2 is amended by revising paragraph 

(a)(2) to read as follows: 

§98.2 Who must report?

(a) * * * 

(2) A facility that contains any source category that 

is listed in Table A-4 of this subpart and that emits 

25,000 metric tons CO2e or more per year in combined 

emissions from stationary fuel combustion units, 

miscellaneous uses of carbonate, and all applicable source 

categories that are listed in Table A-3 and Table A-4 of 

this subpart. For these facilities, the annual GHG report 

must cover stationary fuel combustion sources (subpart C of 

this part), miscellaneous use of carbonates (subpart U of 

this part), and all applicable source categories listed in 

Table A-3 and Table A-4 of this subpart. 

* * * * * 
Page 83 of 87 

3. Section 98.3 is amended as follows: 

a. By adding paragraph (c)(4)(v). 

b. By adding paragraph (c)(10). 

c. By adding paragraph (c)(11). 

§98.3 What are the general monitoring, reporting, 

recordkeeping and verification requirements of this part?

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(4) * * * 

(v) Indicate (yes or no) whether reported emissions 

include emissions from a cogeneration unit located at the 

facility. 

* * * * * 

(10) NAICS code(s) that apply to the reporting 

entity. 

(i) Primary NAICS code. Report the NAICS code that 

most accurately describes the reporting entity’s primary 

product/activity/service. The primary product/activity/ 

service is the principal source of revenue for the 

reporting entity. A reporting entity that has two distinct 

products/activities/services providing comparable revenue 

may report a second primary NAICS code. 

(ii) Additional NAICS code(s). Report all additional 

NAICS codes that describe all product(s)/activity(s)/ 
Page 84 of 87 

service(s) at the reporting entity that are not related to 

the principal source of revenue. 

(11) Legal name(s) and physical address(es) of the 

highest-level United States parent company(s) of the 

reporting entity and the percentage of ownership interest 

for each listed parent company as of December 31 of the 

year for which data are being reported according to the 

following instructions: 

(i) If the reporting entity is entirely owned by a 

single United States company that is not owned by another 

company, provide that company’s legal name and physical 

address as the United States parent company and report 100 

percent ownership. 

(ii) If the reporting entity is entirely owned by a 

single United States company that is, itself, owned by 

another company (e.g., it is a division or subsidiary of a 

higher-level company), provide the legal name and physical 

address of the highest-level company in the ownership 

hierarchy as the United States parent company and report 

100 percent ownership. 

(iii) If the reporting entity is owned by more than 

one United States company (e.g., company A owns 40 percent, 

company B owns 35 percent, and company C owns 25 percent), 

provide the legal names and physical addresses of all the 
Page 85 of 87 

highest-level companies with an ownership interest as the 

United States parent companies, and report the percent 

ownership of each company. 

(iv) If the reporting entity is owned by a joint 

venture or a cooperative, the joint venture or cooperative 

is its own United States parent company. Provide the legal 

name and physical address of the joint venture or 

cooperative as the United States parent company, and report 

100 percent ownership by the joint venture or cooperative. 

(v) If the reporting entity is entirely owned by a 

foreign company, provide the legal name and physical 

address of the foreign company’s highest-level company 

based in the United States as the United States parent 

company, and report 100 percent ownership. 

(vi) If the reporting entity is partially owned by a 

foreign company and partially owned by one or more U.S. 

companies, provide the legal name and physical address of 

the foreign company’s highest-level company based in the 

United States, along with the legal names and physical 

addresses of the other U.S. parent companies, and report 

the percent ownership of each of these companies. 

(vii) If the reporting entity is a federally owned 

facility, report “U.S. Government” and and do not report 

physical address or percent ownership. 
Page 86 of 87 

* * * * * 

3. Section 98.6 is amended by adding definitions of 

“Cogeneration unit,” “North American Industry 

Classification System (NAICS) code(s),” “Physical address,” 

and “United States parent company(s)” in alphabetical order 

to read as follows: 

§98.6 Definitions.

* * * * * 

Cogeneration unit means a unit that produces 

electrical energy and useful thermal energy for industrial, 

commercial, or heating or cooling purposes, through the 

sequential or simultaneous use of the original fuel energy. 

* * * * * 

North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) 

code(s) means the six-digit code(s) that represents the 

product(s)/activity(s)/service(s) at a facility or supplier 

as listed in the Federal Register and defined in "North 

American Industrial Classification System Manual 2007," 

available from the U.S. Department of Commerce, National 

Technical Information Service, Alexandria, VA 22312, phone 

(703)605-6000 or (800)553-6847. 

http://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/. 

* * * * * 
Page 87 of 87 

Physical address, with respect to a United States 

parent company as defined in this section, means the street 

address, city, state and zip code of that company’s 

physical location. 

* * * * * 

United States parent company(s) means the highestlevel United States company(s) with an ownership interest 

in the reporting entity as of December 31 of the year for 

which data are being reported. 

* * * * *