Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 69 / Monday, April 12, 2010 / Proposed Rules 18455 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 98 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0925; FRL–9130–6] 

RIN 2060–AQ02 

Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse 

Gases 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule amendment. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to amend 

the Mandatory Greenhouse Gas (GHG) 

Reporting Rule, to require reporters 

subject to the rule to provide: The name, 

address, and ownership status of their 

U.S. parent company; their primary and 

all other applicable North American 

Industry Classification System (NAICS) 

code(s); and an indication of whether or 

not any of their reported emissions are 

from a cogeneration unit. The 

Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule requires 

greenhouse gas emitting facilities and 

suppliers of fuels and industrial gases 

from all sectors of the economy to report 

their greenhouse gas emissions and to 

provide certain additional supporting 

data in annual reports submitted to 

EPA. 

DATES: Comments. Comments must be 

received on or before June 11, 2010. 

Public Hearing. EPA does not plan to 

conduct a public hearing unless 

requested. To request a hearing, please 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section 

by April 19, 2010. If requested, the 

public hearing will be conducted on or 

about April 19, 2010 in the Washington, 

DC area. EPA will provide further 

information about the hearing on its 

webpage if a hearing is requested. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2009–0925, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRule amendment making 

Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 

Follow the online instructions for 

submitting comments. 

• E-mail: 

GHGReportingCPNAICS@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (202) 566–1741. 

• Mail: Environmental Protection 

Agency, EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), 

Mailcode 2822T, Attention Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0925, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20460. 

• Hand/Courier Delivery: EPA Docket 

Center, Public Reading Room, EPA West 

Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20004, 

Attention Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2009–0925. Such deliveries are 

only accepted during the Docket’s 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2009– 

0925, GHG Reporting Corporate Parent 

and NAICS Code. EPA’s policy is that 

all comments received will be included 

in the public docket without change and 

may be made available online at 

http://www.regulations.gov, including 

any personal information provided, 

unless the comment includes 

information claimed to be confidential 

business information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Do not submit 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, 

Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., 

NW., Washington, DC. 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: 

Carole Cook, Climate Change Division, 

Office of Atmospheric Programs (MC– 

6207J), Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460; telephone 

number: (202) 343–9263; fax number: 

(202) 343–2342; e-mail address: 

GHGMRR@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Additional 

Information on Submitting Comments: 

To expedite review of your comments 

by Agency staff, you are encouraged to 

send a separate copy of your comments, 

in addition to the copy you submit to 

the official docket, to Carole Cook, U.S. 

EPA, Office of Atmospheric Programs, 

Climate Change Division, Mail Code 

6207–J, Washington, DC 20460, 

telephone (202) 343–9263, e-mail 

GHGReportingCPNAICS@epa.gov. 

Regulated Entities. This proposed 

amendment to the Mandatory GHG 

Reporting Rule would affect 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 would 

include those listed in Table 1 of this 

preamble: 

TABLE 1—EXAMPLES OF REGULATED ENTITIES BY CATEGORY

Category NAICS code Examples of regulated entities 

General Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources .......................... .......................... Facilities operating boilers, process heaters, incinerators, turbines, and internal combustion engines: 

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. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
18456 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 69 / Monday, April 12, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 1—EXAMPLES OF REGULATED ENTITIES BY CATEGORY—Continued 

Category NAICS code Examples of regulated entities 

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. 

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. 

Nitric Acid Production ................................................................ 325311 Nitric acid manufacturing facilities. 

Petrochemical Production .......................................................... 32511 Ethylene dichloride manufacturing facilities. 

325199 Acrylonitrile, ethylene oxide, methanol manufacturing facilities. 

325110 Ethylene manufacturing facilities. 

325182 Carbon black manufacturing facilities. 

Petroleum Refineries ................................................................. 324110 Petroleum refineries. 

Phosphoric Acid Production ....................................................... 325312 Phosphoric acid manufacturing facilities. 

Pulp and Paper Manufacturing .................................................. 322110 Pulp mills. 

322121 Paper mills. 

322130 Paperboard mills. 

Silicon Carbide Production ........................................................ 327910 Silicon carbide abrasives manufacturing facilities. 

Soda Ash Manufacturing ........................................................... 325181 Alkalies and chlorine manufacturing facilities. 

212391 Soda ash, natural, mining and/or beneficiation. 

Titanium Dioxide Production ...................................................... 325188 Titanium dioxide manufacturing facilities. 

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. 

Manure1 Management ............................................................... 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. 

Suppliers of Natural Gas and NGLs .......................................... 221210 Natural gas distribution facilities. 

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. 

1EPA is not implementing subpart JJ of the Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule 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 regulated by this 

action. Table 1 lists the types of entities 

that EPA currently is aware of that 

could be potentially affected by this 

action. 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. If you have 

questions regarding the applicability of 

this action to a particular entity, consult 

the person listed in the preceding FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

Acronyms and Abbreviations. The 

following acronyms and abbreviations 

are used in this document. 

CAA Clean Air Act 

CBI confidential business information 

CFC chlorofluorocarbon 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 69 / Monday, April 12, 2010 / Proposed Rules 18457 

2Because they are not covered under 40 CFR part 

98, this rule does not apply to mobile sources. 

3This information would not be required if, upon 

finalization of this rule amendment, EPA decides to 

require reporters to list all of their U.S. parent 

companies and their respective percentages of 

ownership. 

4 If additional categories are proposed and 

finalized in 40 CFR part 98, then this rule 

amendment would apply to those categories as 

well. 

5EPA is not implementing subpart JJ of the 

Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule due to a 

Congressional restriction prohibiting the 

expenditure of funds for this purpose. 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

CO2 carbon dioxide 

CO2e CO2-equivalent 

CUSIP Committee on Uniform Security 

Identification Procedures 

DUNS Data Universal Numbering System 

eGRID Generation Resource Integrated 

Database 

EO Executive Order 

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

FEIN Federal Employee Identification 

Numbers 

GHG greenhouse gas 

HCFC hydrochlorofluorocarbon 

HFC hydrofluorocarbon 

HFE hydrofluoroether 

ICIS Integrated Compliance Information 

System 

ICR Information Collection Request 

NAICS North American Industry 

Classification System 

NIH National Institutes of Health 

NTTAA National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 

OMB Office of Management and Budget 

RCRAInfo Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act database 

RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act 

RGGI Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative 

SBREFA Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act 

SEC Securities and Exchange Commission 

SIC Standard Industrial Classification 

TCR The Climate Registry 

TRI Toxics Release Inventory 

TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act 

UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

U.S. United States 

WCI Western Climate Initiative 

WRI World Resources Institute 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

A. Background on Proposed Rule 

Amendment 

B. Summary of the Proposed Rule 

Amendment 

C. Legal Authority 

D. Relationship to Other Programs 

1. EPA and Other Federal Data Collection 

Programs 

2. Non-Federal Data Collection Programs 

II. Proposed Rule Amendment and Rationale 

A. U.S. Parent Company 

B. NAICS Code 

C. Cogeneration 

D. Frequency of Reporting 

E. Applicability 

F. Request for Comment 

III. Economic Impacts of the Proposed Rule 

Amendment 

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 (RFA) 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

I. Background 

A. Background on Proposed Rule 

Amendment 

The Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule, 

published on October 30, 2009 (74 FR 

56260), requires reporting by facilities 

that emit GHGs (‘‘facilities’’) and by 

suppliers of fuels and industrial gases 

(‘‘suppliers’’). Facilities and suppliers 

that meet the applicability criteria in 

subpart A of 40 CFR part 98 (‘‘regulated 

entities’’ or ‘‘reporters’’) must submit 

annual GHG reports.2 A list of the 

information that all reporters must 

submit in their annual reports is 

included in the general provisions of the 

rule (see 40 CFR 98.3(c)). This list 

includes owner/operator identification 

information, but does not currently 

require reporters to provide information 

on their U.S. parent company, on their 

primary and other applicable NAICS 

code(s), or on whether any of their 

reported emissions are from a 

cogeneration unit. In this notice, EPA 

proposes amendments to the Mandatory 

GHG Reporting Rule that would require 

facilities and suppliers subject to the 

rule to provide this additional 

information in their annual reports. 

This preamble is divided into four 

sections. The first section of the 

preamble provides background and an 

overview of the proposed rule 

amendment, discusses EPA’s legal 

authority under the Clean Air Act (CAA) 

for collecting the proposed additional 

information and describes the 

relationship between this information 

and the information already collected by 

other Federal, regional, and State 

reporting programs. The second section 

of the preamble states the proposed rule 

requirements and summarizes the 

rationale for requiring facilities and 

suppliers subject to the rule to report 

this additional information on an 

annual basis. This section also includes 

a summary of issues associated with the 

proposed rule amendment upon which 

EPA is particularly interested in 

receiving comment. The third section of 

the preamble provides a summary of the 

impacts and costs of the proposed rule 

amendment. The fourth and final 

section of the preamble discusses the 

various statutory and executive order 

requirements applicable to the proposed 

rule amendment. 

B. Summary of the Proposed Rule 

Amendment 

EPA is proposing to add three data 

elements to the list of data elements 

specified in 40 CFR 98.3. These data 

elements would be included in the 

annual GHG reports that facilities and 

suppliers subject to the Mandatory GHG 

Reporting Rule are required to submit. 

Specifically, this proposed rule 

amendment would require each reporter 

to (1) provide the legal name and 

physical address of its highest-level U.S. 

parent company and to indicate its 

ownership status by selecting from a list 

of codes provided by EPA; 3 (2) provide 

its primary and other applicable North 

American Industry Classification 

System (NAICS) code(s); and (3) 

indicate whether any of its reported 

emissions are from a cogeneration unit. 

This proposed rule amendment 

applies to all facilities and suppliers 

required to report under 40 CFR part 98, 

published on October 30, 2009 (74 FR 

56260).4 Therefore, all facilities and 

suppliers that meet the applicability 

criteria in 40 CFR part 98, subpart A 

would be required to report the 

additional data elements included in 

this proposal.5

C. Legal Authority 

EPA is proposing this rule 

amendment under the existing authority 

provided in CAA section 114. As noted 

in the Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule, 

CAA section 114 provides EPA with 

broad authority to require the 

information mandated by this proposed 

rule amendment 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, 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
18458 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 69 / Monday, April 12, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

6For purposes of TRI Form R, a reporter’s parent 

company is defined as the highest-level company, 

located in the United States that directly owns at 

least 50 percent of the voting stock of the company 

(Toxic Chemical Release Inventory Reporting Forms 

and Instructions, EPA 260–R–09–006, October 

2009, page 34). 

7The Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) 

is a unique 9-digit numerical identifier used to 

identify individual business entities in databases 

maintained by Dun & Bradstreet. 

8EPA’s guidance for Risk Management Plans 

states ‘‘Your parent company is the corporation or 

other business entity that owns at least 50 percent 

of the voting stock of your company. If you are 

owned by a joint venture, enter the first of your two 

major owners here. If your company does not have 

a parent company, leave this data element blank.’’ 

Risk Management Plan Guidance, http:// 

www.epa.gov/emergencies/docs/chem/ 

RMPeSubmit_users_manual.pdf#page=33. 

9Under 40 CFR 98.6, ‘‘owner’’ means any person 

who has a legal or equitable title to, has a leasehold 

interest in, or control of a facility or supplier, 

except a person whose legal or equitable title to or 

leasehold interest in the facility or supplier arises 

solely because the person is a limited partner in a 

partnership that has legal or equitable title to, has 

a leasehold interest in, or control of the facility or 

supplier shall not be considered an ‘‘owner’’ of the 

facility or supplier. 

10Under 40 CFR 98.6, ‘‘Operator’’ means any 

person who operates or supervises a facility or 

supplier. 

or persons whom the Administrator 

believes may have necessary 

information, to monitor and report 

emissions and to provide such other 

information as the Administrator 

requests for the purposes of carrying out 

any provision of the CAA (except for a 

provision of title II with respect to 

motor vehicles). 

As discussed in greater detail in the 

response to comments for the final 

Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule, 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. Section 103 of 

the CAA authorizes EPA to establish a 

national research and development 

program, including nonregulatory 

approaches and technologies, for the 

prevention and control of air pollution, 

including greenhouse gases. The data 

collected under this proposed rule 

amendment could inform EPA’s 

implementation of section 103(g) of the 

CAA regarding improvements in sector 

based nonregulatory strategies and 

technologies for preventing or reducing 

air pollutants. 

In addition, corporate parent and 

NAICS code data could assist EPA in 

developing and improving air pollution 

emission inventories. 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 

methods. The additional information 

may also inform regulatory strategies 

being evaluated by EPA. 

Given the broad scope of CAA section 

114, it is appropriate for EPA to gather 

the information required by this 

proposed rule amendment because such 

information is relevant to EPA’s 

carrying out a wide variety of CAA 

provisions. 

D. Relationship to Other Programs 

This section of the preamble discusses 

other Federal and non-Federal reporting 

programs that collect information 

similar to the information that EPA 

would collect under this proposed rule 

amendment. Although considerable 

information on GHG emitting industrial 

facilities and on suppliers of fuel and 

industrial gas is already collected by 

EPA, other Federal and State agencies, 

and private and nonprofit organizations, 

no other source of information meets all 

of the objectives that EPA has set out for 

this proposed rulemaking. Specifically, 

no other reporting program meets all of 

the following criteria: Identifies each 

reporter’s highest-level U.S. parent 

company; identifies each reporter’s 

primary and all other applicable NAICS 

codes; includes information on 

cogeneration; covers all reporters to the 

Greenhouse Gas Mandatory Reporting 

Rule; is collected annually; and is 

available to EPA. 

This section of the preamble reviews 

the data collected under other reporting 

programs and compares those data with 

the data that would be collected under 

this proposed rule amendment. Section 

II of the preamble (Proposed Rule 

Amendment and Rationale) compares 

the specific definitions that EPA is 

proposing to use for U.S. parent 

company, NAICS code, and 

cogeneration unit, for purposes of this 

rule amendment, with the definitions 

used by other Federal and non-Federal 

programs, and explains why we have 

selected the particular definitions that 

are used here. 

1. EPA and Other Federal Data 

Collection Programs U.S. Parent 

Company 

Currently, three EPA programs collect 

parent company information: The 

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) under 

Section 313 of the Emergency Planning 

and Community Right-to-Know Act; 

Risk Management Plans under Section 

212(r) of the Clean Air Act; and the 

Inventory Update Rule under the Toxic 

Substances Control Act (TSCA). Of 

these three programs, TRI is the only 

one that requires reporters to submit 

information on their highest-level U.S. 

parent company.6 TRI requires the 

parent’s name and Dun & Bradstreet 

Universal Numbering System (DUNS) 7

identifier to be reported annually. EPA 

estimates that approximately two-thirds 

of the reporters to the Mandatory GHG 

Reporting Rule are also required to 

report to TRI. 

Risk Management Plans under CAA 

section 212(r) are required to include 

information on ‘‘parent company.’’ 8

However, the parent company reported 

in a Risk Management Plan is not 

necessarily the highest-level U.S. parent 

company. Risk Management Plans are 

generally submitted only once every five 

years, but must be updated when a 

chemical accident occurs at a facility. 

The Inventory Update Rule under TSCA 

requires reporting of both the 

production facility where a specific 

chemical is produced and the corporate 

unit responsible for the production or 

importation of the chemical. However, 

reporters are not required to identify the 

highest-level U.S. parent company and 

the program does not define ‘‘company.’’ 

Several EPA programs under the 

CAA, including the Mandatory GHG 

Reporting Rule, require reporters to 

identify the ‘‘owner or operator’’ of each 

affected facility. In these programs, 

‘‘owner’’ 9 refers to the person or legal 

entity that owns the facility and its 

productive infrastructure. ‘‘Operator’’ 10

refers to the legal entity that controls 

day-to-day operations. Under some 

regulatory and reporting programs, 

‘‘operator’’ refers specifically to the plant 

or site manager. 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 or to 

provide insight into the corporate 

ownership structure because that 

information is not necessary to 

determine compliance with particular 

regulatory requirements. EPA does 

generate information on the highestlevel U.S. parent company of electric 

generating facilities in its Emissions and 

Generation Resource Integrated 

Database (eGRID). However, these 

parent company data are based on 

ownership information reported to the 

Energy Information Administration of 

the U.S. Department of Energy, and on 

internal EPA research. eGRID contains 

U.S. parent company data for 

approximately 5,000 electric generating 

facilities, of which approximately 2,000 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 69 / Monday, April 12, 2010 / Proposed Rules 18459 

11Of the approximately 3,000 electric generating 

facilities that are not projected to be subject to the 

Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule, about half do not 

combust any fossil fuel (e.g., they utilize hydro, 

nuclear, wind or solar power) and the other half 

emit or are expected to emit less than 25,000 metric 

tons of CO2e per year. The approximately 2,000 

electric generating facilities that are projected to be 

subject to the Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule 

account for 99.7% of the total GHG emissions from 

all electric generators. 

12A reporter’s primary North American Industrial 

Classification System (NAICS) code is defined as 

the six-digit NAICS code that represents the 

reporter’s primary product/activity/service as 

defined in ‘‘North American Industrial 

Classification System Manual 2007,’’ available from 

the U.S. Department of Commerce, National 

Technical Information Service. All other NAICS 

codes relating to product(s)/activity(s)/service(s) 

which provide economic profit (but which are not 

related to the principal source of revenue) are 

additional NAICS codes. 

13http://www.epa.gov/chp. 

14EIA–860, Annual Electric Generator Report 

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/ 

eia860.html: and, 

EIA–861, Annual Electric Power Industry Report 

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/ 

eia861.html. 

15Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative: Final 

Model Rule, December 31, 2008 (http:// 

www.westernclimateinitiative.org/component/ 

remository/Reporting-Committee-Documents/DraftEssential-Requirements-for-Mandatory-Reporting— 

Final-Draft-(May-7&-2009)/orderby,4/page,1/). 

16Western Climate Initiative: Final Essential 

Requirements for Mandatory Reporting—July 15, 

2009 (http://www.westernclimateinitiative.org/ 

component/remository/func-startdown/118/). 

17Western Climate Initiative: Background 

Document and Progress Report for Essential 

Requirements of Mandatory Reporting for the 

Western Climate Initiative, January 6, 2009 

(http://www.westernclimateinitiative.org/ 

component/remository/func-startdown/74/). 

are projected to be subject to the 

Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule.11

Primary and Other NAICS Codes 

In addition to collecting information 

on reporters’ U.S. parent companies, 

this proposed rule amendment would 

require facilities and suppliers reporting 

under the Mandatory GHG Reporting 

Rule to report their primary and other 

applicable NAICS codes.12 This 

information is useful for benchmarking 

the environmental performance of 

companies and facilities relative to 

others in their sector. 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 under the Mandatory GHG 

Reporting Rule are also required to 

report to TRI. 

EPA does collect NAICS code 

information through routine compliance 

reporting in multiple programs, but 

those data are not complete. The air 

compliance data contained in the Air 

Facilities System and the water 

compliance data contained in the Permit 

Compliance System both include 

primary NAICS codes, but not other 

relevant NAICS codes. Conversely, the 

compliance data for hazardous waste 

management contained in the Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act database 

(RCRAInfo) include multiple NAICS 

codes for facilities with more than one 

relevant code, but do not identify the 

primary NAICS code. The Integrated 

Compliance Information System (ICIS), 

which houses a variety of enforcement 

records, also includes NAICS codes, but 

does not explain how these codes are 

derived. In addition, none of the 

compliance databases provide complete 

coverage of the facilities subject to the 

Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule. 

Cogeneration 

There are currently no EPA programs 

that require facilities or suppliers to 

report the use of cogeneration units. 

EPA’s Combined Heat and Power 

Partnership, a voluntary program 

created in 2001, requires that Partners 

complete a Letter of Intent stating that 

they agree to provide data on existing 

combined heat and power (also known 

as cogeneration) projects and on new 

project development to help EPA 

determine climate benefits.13 However, 

this is a voluntary program and does not 

provide coverage of all cogeneration 

units. The Energy Information 

Administration does collect information 

on cogeneration from utility and nonutility power generators greater than 1 

megawatt (MW).14

2. Non-Federal Data Collection 

Programs 

EPA is aware of a number of State, 

regional, and international GHG 

reporting programs that are in place or 

under development. In developing this 

proposed rule amendment, EPA 

reviewed 18 State programs. A summary 

of these State programs may be found in 

the docket at EPA–HQ–OAR–2009– 

0925. EPA also reviewed four other 

reporting initiatives or protocols: The 

Climate Registry (TCR), the World 

Resources Institute (WRI) Greenhouse 

Gas Protocol, the Regional Greenhouse 

Gas Initiative (RGGI), and the Western 

Climate Initiative (WCI). In reviewing 

these GHG reporting programs, EPA 

considered whether they contain 

information on U.S. parent company, 

NAICS code(s), or cogeneration that is 

comparable in coverage (of facilities and 

suppliers), specific information 

collected, data quality and timeliness, to 

what would be required under this 

proposed rule amendment. EPA also 

considered whether the Agency had 

access to the data collected under these 

programs. 

In general, EPA found that the data 

collected under State and other nonFederal data collection programs are 

designed to serve the specific purposes 

of those programs and do not appear to 

meet the objectives of this proposed rule 

amendment. 

U.S. Parent Company 

EPA identified two State programs— 

those in California and Delaware—that 

require reporting of parent company 

information. The Climate Registry and 

WRI Greenhouse Gas Protocol also 

encourage reporters to list their parent 

company on a voluntary basis but do 

not require this information. The 

Climate Registry and WRI Greenhouse 

Gas Protocol encourage participating 

organizations to report their GHG 

emissions at the highest organizational 

level (e.g., corporate level), and that the 

organization account for all emissions 

sources. RGGI collects information on 

corporate associations from those 

organizations that submit bids in its 

annual GHG allowance auctions. 

Additional information on the 

collection of corporate and/or parent 

company information by California, 

Delaware, TCR, WCI, and RGGI, as well 

as on the WRI Greenhouse Gas Protocol, 

may be found in the docket at EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2009–0925. 

Primary and Other NAICS Codes 

All of the State programs require 

reporting of either the NAICS codes or 

Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) 

codes. The Western Climate Initiative is 

the only regional reporting program that 

requires reporters to submit their NAICS 

codes as part of their annual report. 

Cogeneration 

Most State reporting programs do not 

require separate reporting of 

cogeneration emissions or notification 

regarding the operation of cogeneration 

units. RGGI does not require any 

additional reporting for cogeneration 

units. WCI requires limited information 

on type of unit and thermal output.15 16

However, WCI is considering including 

separate reporting requirements for 

cogeneration units.17

Of the State programs that require 

cogeneration reporting, the California 

and New Mexico programs have the 

most extensive reporting requirements. 

For these programs, reporters with a 

cogeneration unit must report detailed 

information on the type of unit; the 

amount of electricity generated; the 

amount of thermal energy produced; the 

amount of electricity and thermal 

energy used on site, sold to a distributer, 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
18460 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 69 / Monday, April 12, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

18California Code of Regulations, Title 17, 

Section 95112. 

19New Mexico Greenhouse Gas Mandatory 

Emissions Reporting: Emissions Quantification 

Procedures for 20.2.73 NMAC and 20.2.87 NMAC, 

Emissions Year 2009. http:// 

www.nmenv.state.nm.us/aqb/ghg/documents/ 

NM_GHGEI_quantif_procedures_2009.pdf). 

20The Climate Registry: General Reporting 

Protocol, Version 1.1, May 2008 (http:// 

www.theclimateregistry.org). 

21This information, ‘‘S’’, ‘‘W’’ and ‘‘M’’ would not 

be required under Option 2. 

or provided directly to another 

company; the total GHG emissions for 

the unit; the GHG emissions allocated to 

thermal energy output; and the GHG 

emissions allocated to electricity 

generation. The California reporting rule 

also requires the amount of 

supplemental fuel consumed by duct 

burners for heat recovery steam 

generators.18 19

Although reporting of cogeneration is 

not required by TCR, reporters are 

encouraged to report emissions at the 

unit level and to allocate emissions 

between electric and thermal energy 

outputs for cogeneration units.20

II. Proposed Rule Amendment and 

Rationale 

This section of the preamble explains 

the requirements of the proposed rule 

amendment as well as the rationale for 

EPA’s proposal for collecting the 

additional data elements summarized in 

Section I.B. of this preamble. 

This proposed rule amendment would 

provide information useful to EPA in 

carrying out a number of potential 

nonregulatory and regulatory efforts 

authorized under the CAA, including 

informing the development of future 

climate change strategies. For example, 

through data collected under this 

proposed rule amendment, EPA would 

gain a better understanding of the 

aggregate GHG emissions of 

corporations and specific industry 

sectors. 

A. U.S. Parent Company 

Although the proposed rule language 

includes the requirements for only one 

option (i.e., Option 2 below), EPA is 

proposing two options for collecting 

U.S. parent company information: 

Option 1 

EPA is proposing to require all 

facilities and suppliers subject to the 

Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule (40 CFR 

part 98) to provide the legal name and 

physical address of their U.S. parent 

company. Under this option, a reporter’s 

U.S. parent company is defined as the 

highest-level company, located in the 

United States, and with the largest 

ownership interest in the reporting 

entity as of December 31 of the reporting 

year. The U.S. parent company’s 

physical address is defined as the street 

address, city, state and zip code of the 

U.S. parent company’s physical 

location. 

Each reporter would also be required 

to indicate one of the following with 

respect to its ownership status: 

• ‘‘S’’—single ownership (the 

reporting entity is entirely owned by a 

single company which is not owned by 

any other company, e.g., it is not a 

subsidiary or division of another 

company). 

• ‘‘W’’—wholly owned (the reporting 

entity is entirely owned by a single 

company which is, itself, owned by 

another company, e.g., it is a subsidiary 

or division of another company). 

• ‘‘M’’—multiple owners (the 

reporting entity is owned by more than 

one company).21

Option 2 

EPA is also proposing that reporters 

list the names and physical addresses of 

all of their U.S. parent companies and 

their respective percentages of 

ownership. Under Option 2, EPA 

proposes to define U.S. parent 

company(s) as the highest-level U.S. 

company(s) with an ownership interest 

in the reporting entity as of December 

31 of the reporting year. 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. 

With this option EPA recognizes that 

some facilities and suppliers may be 

owned by multiple companies and seeks 

to gather a more complete picture of the 

ownership status for each reporter. 

Facilities and suppliers would be 

required to report all of their U.S. parent 

companies regardless of the percentage 

of their ownership stake. Note that this 

option would not necessarily ask for all 

of the owners in an individual reporter’s 

corporate structure, just the highestlevel parent companies. If a facility or 

supplier has only one parent company, 

that company should be reported at 100 

percent. 

Reporting all U.S. parent companies 

by their percentage of ownership would 

provide EPA with a more complete 

picture of a facility’s or supplier’s 

parent companies rather than having 

information solely on the parent 

company with the largest ownership 

interest. This option would provide EPA 

with a more complete data set. 

EPA is proposing to provide the 

following instruction to reporters on 

how to report the U.S. parent 

company(s) data element under options 

1 and 2 as described above: 

Each reporter must provide the legal 

name(s) and physical address(es) of 

their U.S. parent company(s). Table 2 of 

this preamble provides examples along 

with additional instruction to assist 

with the determination of a reporter’s 

U.S. parent company(s): 

TABLE 2—PROPOSED INSTRUCTION FOR REPORTERS ON HOW TO REPORT U.S. PARENT COMPANY(S) 

Reporting scenario How to report U.S. parent company under 

Option 1 

How to report U.S. parent company under 

Option 2 

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. 

Mark ‘‘S’’ for Single Ownership in the associated box.

Provide that company’s legal name and physical address as the U.S. parent company. 

Enter 100% as the 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. 

Mark ‘‘W’’ for Wholly Owned in the associated box.

Provide the legal name and physical address 

of the highest-level company in the ownership hierarchy as the U.S. parent company. 

Enter 100% as the percent ownership. 

The reporting entity is owned by more than one 

U.S. company (e.g., company A owns 40%, 

company B owns 35% and company C owns 

25%).

Provide the legal name and physical address 

of the company with the largest ownership 

interest as the U.S. parent company. Mark 

‘‘M’’ for Multiple Owners.

Provide the legal names and physical addresses of all of the companies with an 

ownership interest as U.S. parent companies. Enter the percent ownership of each 

company. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 69 / Monday, April 12, 2010 / Proposed Rules 18461 

22Comment Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– 

0508–0415.1. 

23Comment Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– 

0508–0984.1. 

TABLE 2—PROPOSED INSTRUCTION FOR REPORTERS ON HOW TO REPORT U.S. PARENT COMPANY(S)—Continued 

Reporting scenario How to report U.S. parent company under 

Option 1 

How to report U.S. parent company under 

Option 2 

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. Mark ‘‘W’’ for Wholly Owned in 

the associated box.

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. Enter 100% as the percent ownership. 

The reporting entity is partially owned by a foreign company.(1) If the reporting entity is not entirely owned 

by the foreign company, but the foreign 

company has the largest ownership interest, then 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. Mark ‘‘M’’ for Multiple 

Owners in the associated box.

(2) If the foreign company does not have the 

largest ownership interest in the reporting 

entity, then provide the name and physical 

address of the company with the largest 

ownership interest as the U.S. parent company. Mark ‘‘M’’ for Multiple Owners in the 

associated box.

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 all the 

other companies with an ownership interest, 

as U.S. parent companies. Enter 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. 

Mark ‘‘W’’ for Wholly Owned in the associated box.

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. 

Enter 100% as the percent ownership. 

The reporting entity is a Federally-owned facility Enter U.S. Government, and leave the address field and ownership box blank.Enter U.S. Government, and leave the address and percent ownership fields blank. 

EPA may issue additional guidance 

for reporters after this proposed rule 

amendment is finalized. 

The proposed definition of U.S. 

parent company used in this proposed 

rule amendment is similar to that used 

in the TRI program. However, to 

improve data quality, EPA is proposing 

to slightly modify the definition of the 

U.S. parent company used in the TRI 

program for the purposes of this 

proposed rule amendment. EPA is 

proposing to adjust the ownership 

criteria used in the TRI definition of 

U.S. parent company from over 50 

percent of voting stock to largest 

ownership interest in the company for 

the purpose of this action only. EPA is 

not proposing to alter the definition 

used for the TRI program. In reviewing 

TRI data, EPA has determined that the 

TRI definition may result in incomplete 

information in situations where a 

company has multiple owners, but no 

one company owns over 50 percent. 

In addition, EPA reviewed how 

corporations and/or parent companies 

are defined in the WRI Greenhouse Gas 

Protocol, TCR, and RGGI to determine if 

some or all of the definitions could be 

applied to this proposed rule 

amendment. Neither WRI, TCR, nor 

RGGI have a definition of U.S. parent 

company, and after a review of the 

programs, EPA determined that the 

definitions of corporation (and similar 

terminology depending on the program) 

are not appropriate for this proposed 

rule amendment. For a summary of this 

analysis please see the docket at EPA– 

HQ–OAR–2009–0925. 

Rationale 

The purpose of collecting the name 

and physical address of the U.S. parent 

company(s) on the annual reporting 

form for the Mandatory GHG Reporting 

Rule is to assist in aggregating facilitybased GHG emissions data to the 

corporate level. This additional data 

element would allow EPA to compile 

more comprehensive information on 

corporate GHG emissions and conduct a 

variety of analyses. EPA received some 

comments on the Mandatory GHG 

Reporting Rule from various entities 

supporting the collection of parent 

company data and emphasizing the 

importance of being able to aggregate 

the data to the corporate level. For 

example, one commenter stated that 

‘‘Company identification is a critical 

requirement for * * * understanding 

the impact, risks, and opportunities 

* * * due to climate change.’’ 22

Another commenter stated, ‘‘That the 

EPA [should] add a requirement that 

facilities subject to reporting under the 

proposed rule clearly identify their 

parent company and the proportion of 

the facility the parent/holding company 

owns. Without this information it is 

very difficult to consolidate facility 

level data to company level data 

***’’ 23

EPA recognizes that data aggregated at 

the corporate level would likely be 

incomplete because the Mandatory GHG 

Reporting Rule requires reporting of 

only those emissions for which 

calculation methods are provided in the 

rule and, for certain source categories, 

requires reporting only from those 

facilities and suppliers whose emissions 

are above specified thresholds. In other 

words, corporate-level data might be 

incomplete, because 40 CFR part 98 

does not cover all GHG emissions from 

every source, and some facilities and 

operations within a company may not 

be required to report their GHG 

emissions. 

However, collecting information on 

U.S. parent company(s) would augment 

and complement the facility-level GHG 

emission data currently collected under 

the Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule and 

would not be repetitive of information 

already collected in the rule. In 

addition, the Mandatory GHG Reporting 

Rule covers approximately 85 percent of 

U.S. GHG emissions, therefore the data 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
18462 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 69 / Monday, April 12, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

24 40 CFR 72.2. 

collected under this proposed rule 

amendment would be useful. 

Under Option 1, each reporter would 

report the legal name and physical 

address of their highest-level U.S. 

parent company and would select from 

a list of three possible ownership 

structures, selecting the type of 

ownership that best describes the 

ownership structure for the facility or 

supplier. Using this approach, EPA 

would collect information on whether a 

facility or supplier is owned by a single 

entity or multiple entities. Option 1 

would enable EPA to collect additional 

data on the ownership structure of a 

facility or supplier, which would allow 

(with additional research) a more 

complete picture of a facility’s or 

supplier’s GHG emissions among U.S. 

parent companies, without requiring 

facilities to list all of their owners. 

Under Option 2, facilities and 

suppliers would report the legal names 

and physical addresses of all their U.S. 

parent companies together with each 

U.S. parent company’s percentage of 

ownership. The advantage of this option 

is that it would provide EPA with a 

more complete picture of a facility’s or 

supplier’s parent companies rather than 

having information on solely the parent 

company with the largest ownership 

interest. 

Other Data Element Considered 

EPA considered adding a requirement 

to this proposed rule amendment to 

report a numeric corporate identifier 

derived from a database that would 

verify the facility-parent company 

linkage. EPA considered both private 

and public sources of facility-parent 

company identifiers including the 

following: Dun & Bradstreet Data 

Universal Numbering System (DUNS), 

Securities and Exchange Commission 

(SEC) Central Index Key, Stock Tickers, 

Committee on Uniform Security 

Identification Procedures (CUSIP), 

Federal Employee Identification 

Numbers (FEIN), National Institutes of 

Health (NIH) Electronic Research 

Administration, and LexisNexis. For a 

summary of these corporate identifiers 

please see the docket at EPA–HQ–OAR– 

2009–0925. EPA decided not to propose 

a numeric identifier because none of the 

options considered meet the Agency’s 

data needs. The privately held databases 

such as Dun & Bradstreet DUNS and 

CUSIP require a licensing agreement 

with the Agency, which potentially 

restricts the use of the data. In addition, 

users outside of EPA would need to 

purchase a license to use the numeric 

identifier data element. Several of the 

options considered, such as stock 

tickers, CUSIP, SEC central index key, 

and LexisNexis only cover public 

corporations. The Mandatory GHG 

Reporting Rule covers both private and 

public corporations. In accordance with 

Internal Revenue Code 6103, FEINs can 

only be collected and released on a 

voluntary basis and EPA would have no 

method for evaluating the quality of the 

information. Accordingly we are not 

proposing a corporate numeric 

identifier. 

B. NAICS Code 

In addition to collecting information 

on each reporter’s U.S. parent 

company(s), this proposed rule 

amendment would require each facility 

or supplier reporting under the 

Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule to 

report its primary NAICS code and any 

other NAICS codes applicable to its 

facility. This information is useful 

because it would provide an additional 

data element that can assist EPA to 

further aggregate and analyze the data 

collected under the Mandatory GHG 

Reporting Rule at the sector level. 

For the purposes of this proposed rule 

amendment, EPA is proposing to define 

a reporter’s primary North American 

Industry Classification System (NAICS) 

code as the six-digit code that represents 

the reporter’s primary product/activity/ 

service at the facility, as defined in 

‘‘North American Industry Classification 

System Manual 2007,’’ available from 

the U.S. Department of Commerce, 

National Technical Information Service. 

The primary NAICS code is the 

principal source of revenue. EPA is 

proposing to define additional NAICS 

codes as those codes that correspond to 

product(s)/activity(s)/service(s) that 

provide economic profit, but that are not 

related to the principal source of 

revenue. EPA considered using three 

and four digit NAICS codes, but chose 

the six digit NAICS code(s) because they 

provide more detailed information. In 

addition, use of the six digit NAICS 

codes is consistent with TRI and other 

EPA databases. Therefore, the six digit 

NAICS codes allow data to be compared 

across EPA data sets. 

EPA is proposing the following 

instructions to reporters regarding the 

designation of NAICS code(s): 

Enter the six-digit North American 

Industry Classification System (NAICS) 

code that most accurately describes the 

primary product/activity/service at the 

facility, based on value of shipments. A 

facility may consist of two or more 

distinct and separate economic units 

that may have different NAICS codes. 

Provide all other NAICS codes relating 

to product(s)/activity(s)/service(s) that 

provide economic profit, but that are not 

related to the principal source of 

revenue for your facility, in order of 

largest revenue to smallest. For 

additional guidance on how to 

determine the proper NAICS code(s) go 

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

naics/. 

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 electrical power plant would be 

classified as 221112—electric power 

generation, fossil fuels. 

The proposed definition and 

instructions for reporting NAICS codes 

are consistent with those used by TRI 

and other EPA data collections. In 

addition, the definition and 

methodology for determining the 

primary NAICS code for a facility are 

consistent with the definition and 

methodology used by the Bureau of the 

Census and other government agencies. 

C. Cogeneration 

EPA is proposing to require that 

reporters subject to the Mandatory GHG 

Reporting Rule indicate (by checking 

yes or no) whether some or all of the 

GHG emissions they report are from a 

cogeneration (also known as combined 

heat and power (CHP)) unit located at 

the facility. For the purposes of this 

proposal, a cogeneration unit is defined 

as a unit that produces electric energy 

and useful thermal energy for industrial, 

commercial, or heating and cooling 

purposes, through the sequential [or 

simultaneous] use of the original fuel 

energy.24 EPA based this proposed 

definition of cogeneration on the 

Agency’s Acid Rain Program to promote 

consistency and comparable data 

collection across EPA regulatory 

programs. 

Cogeneration units generate both 

electricity and thermal energy from a 

single fuel source. Because less fuel is 

burned to produce each unit of energy 

output, cogeneration is more efficient 

than separate generation of electricity 

and thermal energy to meet the facility’s 

loads, thereby reducing air pollution 

and GHG emissions. Additional 

efficiencies and emissions reductions 

are gained by the reduction or 

elimination of transmission and 

distribution line losses associated with 

transporting central station generation. 

Facilities with cogeneration units may 

increase their on-site GHG emissions 

when compared to similar facilities 

purchasing central-station electricity 

and generating separate thermal energy 

on-site. This can occur because the 

facility is using cogeneration to 

efficiently generate electric and thermal 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 69 / Monday, April 12, 2010 / Proposed Rules 18463 

25http://www.epa.gov/chp. 26EIA–860, Annual Electric Generator Report 

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/ 

eia860.html: and, EIA–861, Annual Electric Power 

Industry Report http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/ 

electricity/page/eia861.html. 

energy for its own use and in some 

cases, selling excess power to the grid. 

While more fuel is being burned on site, 

it is displacing purchased central 

electric generation off-site, as well as the 

stand-alone generation of on site 

thermal energy, and the associated GHG 

emissions. Even in these cases, 

cogeneration units can result in net 

reductions 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 

greenhouse gas mitigation strategies. 

EPA recognizes that the information 

required under this proposal may not, 

by itself, be sufficient to determine the 

actual quantity of GHG emissions 

occurring from cogeneration units at 

individual reporting facilities, 

companies or NAICS sectors. It would 

also not provide the degree to which 

those cogeneration emissions displace 

fossil fuel or other fuel source emissions 

from central station generation plants. 

However, the proposed information 

would 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). 

This information is not currently 

collected by EPA and only limited data 

are available from other Federal and 

State programs. EPA’s Combined Heat 

and Power Partnership,25 a voluntary 

program created in 2001, requires that 

Partners complete a Letter of Intent that 

states that Partner agrees to provide data 

on existing Combined Heat and Power 

(also known as cogeneration) projects 

and new project development to help 

EPA determine climate benefits. 

Because the Combined Heat and Power 

Partnership is a voluntary program, it is 

not a comprehensive source for this 

data. The data available from the Energy 

Information Administration of the U.S. 

Department of Energy is limited to 

utility and non-utility power generators 

greater than 1 MW.26 By requiring all 

facilities subject to the Mandatory GHG 

Reporting Rule to report the operation of 

cogeneration units at their facility, EPA 

would significantly broaden its 

knowledge regarding the current 

implementation of cogeneration in all 

sectors of the economy. By collecting 

this information annually, EPA would 

also be able to track changes in the use 

of this technology in individual sectors 

and across the entire U.S. economy. 

The burden of reporting this 

additional information to EPA would be 

minimal, because reporters are already 

required to submit annual reports and 

should readily know (or could quickly 

determine), whether there is a 

cogeneration unit at the facility. 

D. Frequency of Reporting 

EPA is proposing to require that 

facilities and suppliers subject to the 

Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule submit 

information regarding their U.S. parent 

company, 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 is further proposing 

to require that regulated entities report 

this information as it exists on 

December 31 of the reporting year, to be 

consistent with other EPA reporting 

programs, such as TRI. 

EPA recognizes that a reporter’s U.S. 

parent company 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 

determined that if it were to require 

reporters to update these data elements 

more than once a year, such as every 

time there is a change in a reporter’s 

U.S. parent company, or in its primary 

product, activity, or service, the burden 

of this information collection would be 

greater than the benefit of obtaining that 

additional information. Therefore, EPA 

is proposing that reporters only be 

required to report on these data 

elements once a year, as part of their 

regularly scheduled annual reports. 

E. Applicability 

EPA proposes that all facilities and 

suppliers subject to the Mandatory GHG 

Reporting Rule be required to report the 

additional information proposed in this 

amendment. The proposed definitions 

of ‘‘U.S. parent company,’’ ‘‘primary and 

other applicable NAICS code(s),’’ and 

‘‘cogeneration unit’’ would apply only to 

this proposal to add these data elements 

to the list of items that must be reported 

under 40 CFR 98.3(c) of subpart A. The 

proposed definitions would not change 

the applicability of any subpart in the 

promulgated Mandatory GHG Reporting 

Rule (40 CFR part 98). They also would 

not change the level of reporting or who 

is required to submit reports. 

The proposed definition of U.S. 

parent company would not override or 

change the meaning of similar terms 

that refer to company level or corporate 

level requirements. Many subparts 

(including subparts A, C, G, K, P, Q, R, 

Y, GG, and HH) use the term ‘‘company 

records,’’ which is defined in subpart A. 

The term ‘‘corporate level’’ is used in 

subpart MM to require importers and 

exporters to report at the corporate 

level, rather than the facility level. 

‘‘Corporate documents’’ are referred to in 

subpart A. None of these terms, 

definitions, or associated requirements 

would be affected by the proposed 

definition of ‘‘U.S. parent company.’’ 

In addition, the proposed definition of 

U.S. parent company would also not 

affect the definitions of ‘‘importer’’ and 

‘‘exporter’’ in subpart A, or the 

applicability of the suppliers source 

categories (40 CFR part 98). The 

proposed definition also does not affect 

the term ‘‘local distribution company’’ as 

described in 40 CFR part 98, subpart 

NN. These terms retain their meaning in 

the Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule. 

F. Request for Comment 

EPA requests comments on its 

proposal to require reporters under the 

Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule (40 CFR 

part 98) to provide information 

regarding their U.S. parent company, 

their NAICS code(s), and whether any of 

their reported emissions are from a 

cogeneration unit. 

While EPA is interested in receiving 

comments on the proposal in its 

entirety, EPA is particularly interested 

in receiving comments on the following 

issues. First, EPA is interested in 

receiving comments on using numeric 

corporate identifiers and whether there 

are additional numeric identifiers the 

Agency should consider for this 

proposed rule amendment. 

Second, EPA solicits comments on 

whether it should be mandatory or 

voluntary for reporters to indicate 

whether or not any of their emissions 

arise from the operation of cogeneration 

units. EPA is interested in receiving 

comments, data, and analysis on both 

the option of mandating the disclosure 

of this information, and the option of 

making the reporting of this information 

voluntary. 

Third, EPA solicits comments on 

whether facilities and suppliers owned 

by foreign companies always have a 

U.S.-based parent company as defined 

in today’s proposal. EPA is interested in 

receiving comments, data and analysis 

on whether there may be instances 

where foreign-owned facilities and 

suppliers do not have a U.S. parent 

company. Where commenters believe 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
18464 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 69 / Monday, April 12, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

that such instances may occur, EPA 

seeks suggestions on how to address this 

issue. 

Lastly, EPA solicits comments 

regarding the utility and burden of 

updating the additional information 

required by this proposed rule 

amendment on a more frequent basis 

than the proposed annual reporting. For 

example, should reporters be required to 

update the information whenever 

changes occur with respect to a 

reporter’s U.S. parent company or 

NAICS code(s)? 

While this notice seeks comments on 

EPA’s proposal to collect information on 

the U.S. parent company(s) and NAICS 

code(s) of facilities and suppliers 

required to report under the Mandatory 

GHG Reporting Rule, and on whether 

any of the emissions reported by these 

entities are from cogeneration units, 

EPA is not reopening the final 

Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule, and is 

seeking no further comment on the 

Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule. 

III. Economic Impacts of the Proposed 

Rule Amendment 

This section of the preamble examines 

the costs and economic impacts of the 

proposed 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 proposed rule 

can be found in the text of the Economic 

Impact Analysis (EIA) (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 the 

Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule and 

compliance costs associated with 

reporting the data elements described 

above. EPA estimated compliance costs 

based on the time reporters spend 

meeting the proposed requirements and 

the associated labor wage rates. EPA’s 

estimated costs of compliance are 

discussed below and in greater detail in 

Section 4 of the Economic Impact 

Analysis (EIA) (EPA–HQ–OAR–2009– 

0925). 

Labor Costs. All of the reporting costs 

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 Toxics Release 

Inventory (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 to 

provide the required information is 

estimated to be, under Option 1, 80 

minutes per facility in the first year and 

40 minutes per facility in subsequent 

years. Under Option 2, the amount of 

time required for facilities with one 

owner is 80 minutes per facility in the 

first year and 40 minutes per facility in 

subsequent years; time estimated for 

facilities with more than one owner is 

125 minutes per facility in the first year 

and 85 minutes per facility in 

subsequent years. 

Cost basis. The cost analysis is based 

on facilities and suppliers currently 

subject to the Mandatory GHG Reporting 

Rule and does not account for those 

expected to be added to the program 

through upcoming supplemental 

proposals. The methods and 

assumptions used to estimate the 

compliance costs for facilities and 

suppliers currently subject to the rule 

would likewise apply to those that may 

be added to the Mandatory GHG 

Reporting Rule program in the future. 

The addition of new facilities or 

suppliers would increase the total 

compliance costs in proportion to the 

increase of the reporting universe. 

Accordingly, EPA does not expect the 

burden for newly added industries to 

change the conclusions of this economic 

analysis. 

B. What are the costs of the rule? 

1. Summary of Costs 

As shown in Table 3 of this preamble, 

the total national cost under Option 1 is 

approximately $877,000 in the first year 

and about $436,000 in subsequent years 

(all estimates are in $2006). These 

estimates include a public sector burden 

estimate of $85,000 in the first year and 

$40,000 in subsequent years for program 

implementation and verification 

activities. 

Total national cost under Option 2 is 

approximately $889,000 in the first year 

and about $443,000 in subsequent years 

(all estimates are in $2006). Option 2 

costs include a public sector burden 

estimate of $90,000 in the first year and 

$40,000 in subsequent years for program 

implementation and verification 

activities. See Table 3 in the next 

section 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 proposed 

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 (SBREFA), EPA assessed 

the potential impacts of the rule on 

small entities (small businesses, 

governments, and non-profit 

organizations). (See Section VI.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 

would be less than 0.01%. 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 associated with the proposed 

rule amendment 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– 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 69 / Monday, April 12, 2010 / Proposed Rules 18465 

2009–0925) for this action and is briefly 

summarized here. In the economic 

analysis, EPA has identified the 

proposed rule’s two alternative options 

as well as a summary of the compliance 

burden and the costs. The cost analysis, 

presented in Section III of this 

preamble, estimates the total annualized 

burden, which is presented in Table 3 

of this preamble: 

TABLE 3—COST SUMMARY FOR TWO ALTERNATIVES UNDER THE PROPOSED RULEMAKING

Cost 

Option 1 (in thousands, $2006) Option 2 (in thousands, $2006) 

Year 1 Subsequent 

years Year 1 Subsequent years 

National compliance ........................................................................................ $792 $396 $799 $403 

Public ............................................................................................................... 85 40 90 40 

Total .......................................................................................................... 877 436 889 443 

Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding. 

Overall, EPA has concluded that the 

costs of the proposal to collect U.S. 

parent company(s), NAICS codes, and 

cogeneration information as part of the 

Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule are 

outweighed by the potential benefits of 

more comprehensive information about 

GHG emissions. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The information collection 

requirements for this proposed rule 

amendment has been submitted for 

approval to the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. 

An Information Collection Request (ICR) 

document was previously prepared for 

the final Mandatory GHG Reporting 

Rule and was assigned EPA ICR number 

2300.03. The information collection 

requirements of this proposed rule 

amendment to the Mandatory GHG 

Reporting Rule are documented in an 

additional ICR document, which was 

assigned EPA ICR number 2374.01. 

The collection of additional 

information from facilities and suppliers 

reporting under the Mandatory GHG 

Reporting Rule identifying U.S. parent 

company(s), primary and other 

applicable NAICS codes, and an 

indication of whether or not the 

reported emissions include any 

emissions from a cogeneration unit, 

would assist EPA in aggregating facility 

level data to the corporate and sector 

levels. In addition, users of the data 

could compare emissions among 

facilities with and without cogeneration. 

This proposed rule amendment would 

provide information useful for a variety 

of policies, and potential nonregulatory 

and regulatory efforts, including 

informing the development of future 

climate change regulatory strategies. For 

example, through data collected under 

this proposed rule amendment, EPA 

would gain a better understanding of the 

aggregate GHG emissions of 

corporations and specific industry 

sectors. 

This information collection is 

mandatory and will be carried out under 

CAA section 114. Information identified 

and marked as CBI will not be disclosed 

except in accordance with procedures 

set forth in 40 CFR part 2. However, 

emissions information collected under 

CAA section 114 cannot be claimed as 

CBI and will be made public. 

The projected average annual cost and 

hour burden for non-Federal 

respondents is about $528,000 and 

8,800 hours under option 1 and 

$535,000 and 8,900 hours under option 

2. The estimated average annual burden 

per response is 0.15 hour per either 

option; the proposed frequency of 

response is annual for all respondents 

that must comply with the proposed 

rule amendment; and the estimated 

average number of likely respondents 

per year is 9,868 under either option. 

The cost burden to respondents 

resulting from the collection of 

information includes the total capital 

cost annualized over the equipment’s 

expected useful life (averaging $ 0), a 

total operation and maintenance 

component (averaging $0 per year), and 

a labor cost component (averaging 

$528,000 per year under Option 1 and 

$535,000 under Option 2). Burden is 

defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). 

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. 

To comment on the Agency’s need for 

this information, the accuracy of the 

provided burden estimates, and any 

suggested methods for minimizing 

respondent burden, EPA has established 

a public docket for this proposed rule 

amendment. Submit any comments 

related to the ICR to EPA and OMB. See 

ADDRESSES section at the beginning of 

this notice for where to submit 

comments to EPA. Send comments to 

OMB at the Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs, Office of 

Management and Budget, 725 17th 

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, 

Attention: Desk Office for EPA. Since 

OMB is required to make a decision 

concerning the ICR between 30 and 60 

days after April 12, 2010, a comment to 

OMB is best assured of having its full 

effect if OMB receives it by May 12, 

2010. The final rule amendment will 

respond to any OMB or public 

comments on the information collection 

requirements contained in this proposal. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

The RFA generally requires an agency 

to prepare a regulatory flexibility 

analysis of any rule amendment subject 

to notice and comment requirements 

under the Administrative Procedure Act 

or any other statute, unless the agency 

certifies that the rule amendment will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. Small entities include small 

businesses, small organizations, and 

small governmental jurisdictions. 

For purposes of assessing the impacts 

of the proposed rule amendment 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-forprofit enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of the proposed rule 

amendment 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 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
18466 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 69 / Monday, April 12, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

each option are substantially smaller 

(option 1: Less than $81 in year 1 and 

$41 in subsequent years) (option 2: 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 

proposed rule amendment include small 

businesses across all sectors 

encompassed by the rule, small 

governmental jurisdictions and small 

non-profits. We have determined that 

some small businesses will be affected 

because their production processes emit 

GHGs that must be reported, or because 

they have stationary combustion units 

on site that emit GHGs that must be 

reported. Small governments and small 

non-profits are generally affected 

because they have regulated landfills or 

stationary combustion units on site, or 

because they own a local distribution 

company subject to 40 CFR part 98, 

subpart NN (natural gas suppliers). 

At promulgation of the final 

Mandatory GHG Reporting rule, EPA 

examined the impact on small entities 

(74 FR 56369). In addition, EPA 

described the steps the EPA took to 

reduce the impact of the Mandatory 

GHG Reporting Rule on small entities 

(74 FR 56369). 

EPA continues to be interested in the 

potential impacts of the proposed rule 

amendment on small entities and 

welcomes comments on issues related to 

such impacts. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

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 

inform, educate, and advise small 

governments on compliance with the 

regulatory requirements. 

The proposed rule amendment 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 Economic Impact Analysis, EPA 

estimated the several national cost 

estimates and found annual 

expenditures were below $100 million 

threshold ($400,000 to $1.5 million, 

including the sensitivity analysis.) 

Thus, the proposed rule amendment is 

not subject to the requirements of 

sections 202 or 205 of UMRA. 

The proposed rule amendment is also 

not subject to the requirements of 

section 203 of UMRA because it 

contains no regulatory requirements that 

might significantly or uniquely affect 

small governments. The proposed new 

rule requires facilities and suppliers 

already subject to the Mandatory GHG 

Reporting Rule 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. 

The proposed rule amendment to the 

Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule applies 

directly to reporters that supply fuel or 

industrial gases that when used emit 

greenhouse gases, and to reporters that 

directly emit greenhouses gases. The 

proposed rule amendment does not 

apply to governmental entities unless 

the government entity owns a facility 

that directly emits greenhouse gases 

above threshold levels such as a landfill 

or large stationary combustion source. 

In addition, the proposed rule 

amendment 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 

proposed rule amendment 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 the Mandatory 

GHG Reporting Rule relates to existing 

State programs, please see Section II of 

the preamble to the final Mandatory 

GHG Reporting Rule (74 FR 56266). 

This proposed rule amendment 

applies directly to reporters that supply 

fuel or chemicals that when used emit 

greenhouse gases or facilities that 

directly emit greenhouses gases. It does 

not apply to governmental entities 

unless the government entity owns a 

facility that directly emits greenhouse 

gases above threshold levels such as a 

landfill or large stationary combustion 

source, so relatively few government 

facilities would be affected. This 

proposed rule amendment 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. 

In the spirit of EO 13132, and 

consistent with EPA policy to promote 

communications between EPA and State 

and local governments, EPA specifically 

solicits comments on this proposed 

action from State and local officials. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This proposed rule amendment is not 

expected to have Tribal implications, as 

specified in EO 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000). The proposed 

amendment applies directly to entities 

that supply fuel or chemicals that when 

used emit greenhouse gases or facilities 

that directly emit greenhouses gases. 

This proposed rule amendment does not 

pose significant costs on either a perentity or national basis; few, if any, 

facilities or suppliers that are expected 

to be affected by the proposed rule 

amendment are anticipated to be owned 

by Tribal governments. This proposed 

rule amendment 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 

proposed amendment. 

Although EO 13175 does not apply to 

this proposed rule amendment, EPA 

sought opportunities to provide 

information to Tribal governments and 

representatives during development of 

the rule amendment, as documented in 

the preamble to the promulgated 

Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule (74 FR 

56371). 

EPA specifically solicits additional 

comment on this proposed rule 

amendment from Tribal officials. 

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. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 69 / Monday, April 12, 2010 / Proposed Rules 18467 

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 104– 

113 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to 

use voluntary consensus standards in its 

regulatory activities unless to do so 

would be inconsistent with applicable 

law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary 

consensus standards are technical 

standards (e.g., materials specifications, 

test methods, sampling procedures, and 

business practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA 

to provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when the Agency decides 

not to use available and applicable 

voluntary consensus standards. 

This proposed rule amendment does 

not involve technical standards. 

Therefore, EPA is not considering the 

use of any voluntary consensus 

standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994) establishes Federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

Federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

EPA has determined that this 

proposed rule amendment will not have 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on minority or low-income populations 

because it does not affect the level of 

protection provided to human health or 

the environment. The proposed rule 

amendment does not affect the level of 

protection provided to human health or 

the environment because it addresses 

information collection and reporting. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 98 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Greenhouse gases, Incorporation by 

reference, Suppliers, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: March 22, 2010. 

Lisa P. Jackson, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, title 40, chapter I, of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is proposed to be 

amended as follows: 

PART 98—[AMENDED] 

1. The authority citation for part 98 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart A—[Amended] 

2. Section 98.3 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 whether reported 

emissions from the facility include 

emissions from a cogeneration unit (yes 

or no). 

* * * * * 

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

facility or supplier. 

(i) Primary NAICS code. Report the 

NAICS code(s) that most accurately 

describes the primary product/activity/ 

service at the facility, based on revenue. 

The primary product/activity/service at 

the facility provides economic profit 

and is the principal source of revenue. 

(ii) Additional NAICS code(s). Report 

additional NAICS codes that correspond 

to product(s)/activity(s)/service(s) at the 

facility that provide economic profit, 

but that are not related to the principal 

source of revenue. If more than one 

additional NAICS code applies, list the 

additional NAICS codes in the order of 

the largest revenue to the smallest. 

(11) Legal name(s) and physical 

address(es) of the highest-level United 

States parent company(s) and the 

percentage of ownership interest for 

each listed parent company as of 

December 31 of the reporting year. 

(i) For reporting the United States 

parent company(s) and their 

percentage(s) of ownership interest, 

follow these instructions: 

(A) 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. 

(B) 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. 

(C) 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 companies with an ownership 

interest as the United States parent 

companies and report the percent 

ownership of each. 

(D) If the reporting entity is owned by 

a joint venture or a cooperative, the joint 

venture or cooperative is its own U.S. 

parent company. Provide the legal name 

and physical address of the joint 

venture or cooperative as the United 

States parent company, and report 100 

percent ownership by the joint venture 

or cooperative. 

(E) 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. 

(F) If the reporting entity is partially 

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, 

along with the legal names and physical 

addresses of all the other companies 

with an ownership interest, as United 

States parent companies, and report the 

percent ownership of each of these 

companies. 

(G) If you are reporting for a federally 

owned facility, report ‘‘U.S. 

Government’’ and do not report physical 

address or percent ownership. 

(ii) [Reserved] 

* * * * * 

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 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
18468 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 69 / Monday, April 12, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

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 

defined in ‘‘North American Industrial 

Classification System Manual 2007,’’ 

available from the U.S. Department of 

Commerce, National Technical 

Information Service. 

* * * * * 

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) 

mean the highest-level United States 

company(s) with an ownership interest 

in the reporting entity as of December 

31 of the reporting year. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2010–6765 Filed 4–8–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS