6560-50

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 98

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0929; FRL-9916-76-OAR]

RIN 2060-AQ81

Revisions to Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements, and Confidentiality 

Determinations Under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program; Final Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is amending the reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements of the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program. These amendments 

include an alternative verification approach in lieu of collecting certain data elements for which 

the EPA has identified disclosure concerns and for which the reporting deadline was deferred 

until March 31, 2015. The alternative verification approach includes the addition of new 

verification, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements while maintaining the EPA’s ability to 

verify emissions and ensure compliance with the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program. In 

conjunction with the amendments, the EPA is establishing final confidentiality determinations 

for the new data elements added in this action.

DATES: This final rule is effective on [insert date 30 days after publication in the Federal 

Register].

ADDRESSES: 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., confidential 

business information (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. 
Page 2 of 186

Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in 

http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Docket, EPA/DC, William Jefferson 

Clinton Building 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 GENERAL 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; email address: GHGreporting@epa.gov. For technical information, 

contact the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule Helpline at: 

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/ghgrule_contactus.htm. Alternatively, contact 

Carole Cook at 202–343–9263.

Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy 

of this final rule, memoranda to the docket, and all other related information will also be 

available through the WWW on the EPA’s greenhouse gas reporting rule website at 

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulated Entities. This final rule revision on reporting and recordkeeping requirements

and verification procedures affects entities that must submit annual greenhouse gas (GHG) 

reports under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) (40 CFR part 98). The 

Administrator has determined that 40 CFR part 98 is subject to the provisions of Clean Air Act 

(CAA) section 307(d). See CAA section 307(d)(1)(V) (the provisions of CAA section 307(d) 
Page 3 of 186

apply to “such other actions as the Administrator may determine”). Entities affected by this final 

rule are owners and operators of facilities that are direct emitters of GHGs, which include those 

listed in Table 1 of this preamble: 

Table 1—Examples of Affected Entities by Category

Category NAICS Examples of affected facilities

General Stationary Fuel 

Combustion Sources

Facilities operating boilers, process heaters, 

incinerators, turbines, and internal combustion engines.

321 Manufacturers of lumber and wood products.

322 Pulp and paper mills.

325 Chemical manufacturers.

324 Petroleum refineries and manufacturers of coal 

products.

316, 326, 

339

Manufacturers of rubber and miscellaneous plastic 

products.

331 Steel works, blast furnaces.

332 Electroplating, plating, polishing, anodizing, and 

coloring.

336 Manufacturers of motor vehicle parts and accessories.

221 Electric, gas, and sanitary services.

622 Health services.

611 Educational services.

325193 Ethyl alcohol manufacturing facilities.

311611 Meat processing facilities

311411 Frozen fruit, juice, and vegetable manufacturing 

facilities.

311421 Fruit and vegetable canning facilities.

Adipic Acid Production 325199 Adipic acid manufacturing facilities.

Aluminum Production 331312 Primary aluminum production facilities

Ammonia 

Manufacturing

325311 Anhydrous and aqueous ammonia production 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 production facilities
Page 4 of 186

Category NAICS Examples of affected 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 production facilities

Petrochemical 

Production

32511 Ethylene dichloride production facilities.

325199 Acrylonitrile, ethylene oxide, methanol production 

facilities.

325110 Ethylene production facilities.

325182 Carbon black production facilities.

Petroleum and Natural 

Gas Systems

486210 Pipeline transportation of natural gas.

221210 Natural gas distribution facilities.

211 Extractors of crude petroleum and natural gas.

211112 Natural gas liquid extraction 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.

311411 Frozen fruit, juice and vegetable manufacturing 

facilities.

311421 Fruit and vegetable canning facilities.

Wastewater Treatmenta322110 Pulp mills.

322121 Paper mills.

322122 Newsprint mills.

322130 Paperboard mills.

311611 Meat processing facilities.

311411 Frozen fruit, juice and vegetable manufacturing 

facilities.

311421 Fruit and vegetable canning facilities.

325193 Ethanol manufacturing facilities.
Page 5 of 186

a The inputs to emission equations (for which reporting was deferred to 2015) in these categories were evaluated 

following the four-step process set forth in the memorandum entitled “Process for Evaluating and Potentially 

Amending Part 98 Inputs to Emission Equations ” (Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0929). Refer to 

Section 1.B of the proposal preamble (78 FR 55994, September 11, 2013) for further information regarding this 

evaluation. No amendment to the subpart affecting this industry category was proposed as a result of the 

evaluation. Accordingly, today’s final action does not include any amendment to this subpart. Refer to Section 

II.B of this preamble for further discussion of the EPA’s decision.

Table 1 of this preamble is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for 

readers regarding facilities and suppliers likely to be affected by this action. Types of facilities 

other than those listed in this table might also be affected by this action. To determine whether 

you are affected by this action, you should carefully examine the applicability criteria found in 

40 CFR part 98, subpart A or the relevant criteria in the subparts. If you have questions regarding 

the applicability of this action to a particular facility or supplier, consult the person listed in the 

preceding FOR FURTHER GENERAL INFORMATION CONTACT section.

Many facilities that are affected by 40 CFR part 98 have GHG emissions from multiple 

source categories listed in Table 1 of this preamble.

Judicial Review. Under CAA section 307(b)(1), judicial review of this final rule is 

available only by filing a petition for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia Circuit (the Court) by [insert date 60 days after publication in the Federal 

Register]. Under CAA section 307(d)(7)(B), only an objection to this final rule that was raised 

with reasonable specificity during the period for public comment can be raised during judicial 

review. Section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA also provides a mechanism for the EPA to convene a 

proceeding for reconsideration, “[i]f the person raising an objection can demonstrate to EPA that 

it was impracticable to raise such objection within [the period for public comment] or if the 

grounds for such objection arose after the period for public comment (but within the time 

specified for judicial review) and if such objection is of central relevance to the outcome of the 

rule.” Any person seeking to make such a demonstration to us should submit a Petition for 
Page 6 of 186

Reconsideration to the Office of the Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, Room 

3000, William Jefferson Clinton Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 

20460, with a copy to the person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER GENERAL 

INFORMATION CONTACT section, and the Associate General Counsel for the Air and 

Radiation Law Office, Office of General Counsel (Mail Code 2344A), Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20004. Note that under CAA section 

307(b)(2), the requirements established by this final rule may not be challenged separately in any 

civil or criminal proceedings brought by the EPA to enforce these requirements.

Acronyms and Abbreviations. The following acronyms and abbreviations are used in this 

document.

CAA Clean Air Act

CaO Calcium oxide

CAR Climate Action Reserve

CBI Confidential business information

CEMS continuous emissions monitoring system

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CKD Cement kiln dust

CO2 Carbon dioxide

e-GGRT Electronic Greenhouse Gas Reporting Tool

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

FISMA Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002

FR Federal Register

FTC Federal Trade Commission

GHG Greenhouse gas

GHGRP Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program

HCFC-22 Chlorodifluoromethane

HFC Hydrofluorocarbons

HTML Hypertext markup language

ICR Information Collection Request

IVT Inputs Verification Tool
Page 7 of 186

KA Ketone-alcohol oil (or cyclohexanol)

lb Pound

MMBtu Million British thermal units

N2O Nitrous oxide

NAICS North American Industry Classification System

NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology

NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

OMB Office of Management & Budget

PUC Public utility commission

RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act

SSM Startup, shutdown, and malfunction

TLS Transport Layer Security

TRI Toxics Release Inventory

UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

U.S. United States

WWW Worldwide Web

XML Extensible markup language

Organization of This Document. The following outline is provided to aid in locating information 

in this preamble. 

I. Executive Summary, Background, and Overview

A. How is this preamble organized?

B. Executive Summary

C. Background on the Action

D. Subparts Covered in the Final Rule

E. Legal Authority

II. Summary of Final Amendments to Part 98

A. Addition of a Requirement for Certain Reporters to Use an Inputs Verification Tool (IVT) to 

Enter Certain Data Elements

B. Removal of the Requirement to Report Certain Data Elements

C. Revision of Recordkeeping Requirements For Facilities Required To Use IVT

D. Addition of Reporting Requirements for Certain Facilities Required to Use IVT

III. Summary of Final Confidentiality Determinations for New Data Elements

A. Summary of Final CBI Determinations

B. Response to Public Comments

IV. Impacts of the Final Rule
Page 8 of 186

A. How were the costs of this final rule estimated?

B. Do the Final Confidentiality Determinations Change the Impacts of the Final Amendments?

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: 

Improving Regulation and Regulatory 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

K. Congressional Review Act

I. Executive Summary, Background, and Overview

A. How is this preamble organized?

Section I of this preamble provides background information regarding the origin of the 

final amendments. Section I also discusses the EPA’s legal authority under the CAA to 

promulgate and amend the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule (40 CFR part 98, hereinafter referred 

to as “Part 98”) and the EPA’s legal authority to make confidentiality determinations for new 

data elements required by this amendment. Section II of this preamble describes the final 

amendments to Part 98, which includes the EPA’s proposed alternative verification approach. 

Section II of this preamble also describes the major changes made since proposal to the 

alternative verification approach and provides brief summaries of significant public comments 

and the EPA’s responses thereto. Section III of this preamble finalizes the confidentiality 

determinations for the new data reporting elements being added to Part 98 in this action. Section 

IV of this preamble discusses the impacts of the final amendments. Section V of this preamble 

describes the statutory and executive order requirements applicable to this action.
Page 9 of 186

B. Executive Summary

The EPA is finalizing the proposed alternative verification approach for the GHGRP, 

with some changes made in response to public comments. The alternative verification approach 

includes amendments to reporting and recordkeeping requirements of Part 98, as follows:

 Adding a requirement for certain reporters under 23 subparts to use an EPA-provided 

inputs verification tool (IVT). For these subparts, 324 inputs to emission equations for 

which reporting was deferred to 2015 and for which disclosure concerns have been 

identified must be entered into IVT.

1

IVT will perform electronic verification on the 

entered inputs to emission equations and use the entered inputs to calculate the emission 

equation results. IVT will not retain the entered inputs (i.e., the inputs are not reporting 

requirements under Part 98); instead, IVT will conduct certain checks (e.g., accuracy of 

the inputs and the calculated emissions values) at the time of data entry and generate a 

verification summary. The EPA will not have access to the entered inputs either during 

the time of entry or any time thereafter. However, the verification summary, which will

be accessible to the EPA once the reporter has completed using IVT and the annual report 

is submitted, will provide the EPA with information to conduct further verification if 

necessary.

 For 23 subparts, removing the requirement to report 378 inputs to emission equations for 

which reporting was deferred to 2015 and for which disclosure concerns have been 

identified.2

 For reporters required to use IVT, specifying the format for maintaining records of data 

entered into IVT so that all such records are maintained in a consistent format; and for 

each facility subject to the IVT requirement, lengthening the record retention period from 

3 to 5 years for all data entered into IVT and for other records maintained by the 

reporting facility under Part 98 (including subparts not required to use IVT).

 For certain reporters required to use IVT, adding new data elements to be reported.

The EPA is not amending the reporting requirements for 151 inputs to emission equations 

for which reporting was deferred, but for which disclosure concerns were not identified and the 

 

1 Under this final action, IVT would not be required to be used by reporters for any reported GHG for which the reporter uses a 

continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS) or an EPA-approved alternative method—as allowed under 40 CFR 

98.33(a)(5), 98.53(a)(2), and 98.223(a)(2) to calculate the reported GHG value, rather than using inputs to emission equations 

(for which reporting was deferred to 2015) and the associated EPA-provided calculation methodologies to calculate the reported 

GHG value.

2 As mentioned above, there are 378 equation inputs for which reporting was deferred to 2015 and for which the EPA determined 

there are disclosure concerns, and 324 of these equation inputs must be entered into IVT. Fifty-four of the 378 equation inputs do 

not need to be entered into IVT because these equation inputs are redundant to other equations inputs being entered into IVT or 

are otherwise not needed for verification.
Page 10 of 186

data remain useful. For these inputs to emission equations, the deferral will expire on March 31, 

2015, by which date these inputs must be reported.

3

This alternative verification approach builds on the EPA’s experience and success with 

electronic reporting and verification during the first 4 years of the GHGRP. This alternative 

verification approach, which includes additional verification checks that IVT will conduct on 

data entered into IVT (during the data entry process), provides the EPA with information 

necessary to identify facilities with potential reporting errors and conduct further verification 

following the submission of annual reports. This alternative verification approach, including its 

associated revisions to recordkeeping and reporting requirements, provides an alternative to 

collecting certain data elements for which disclosure concerns have been identified, while 

maintaining the EPA’s ability to verify data and ensure compliance with the GHGRP.

Also, in conjunction with the amendments, the EPA is establishing confidentiality 

determinations for the new data elements finalized in this action.

C. Background on the Action

On October 30, 2009, the EPA published the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule, 40 CFR 

part 98, requiring annual reporting of GHG data from a broad range of industry sectors (74 FR 

56260). Under Part 98, the EPA requires annual reporting of data from certain facilities and 

suppliers above specified emission or quantity-supplied thresholds. On July 7, 2010 (75 FR 

39094) and subsequent proposals (77 FR 1434, January 10, 2012; 77 FR 10434, February 22, 

2012), we proposed confidentiality determinations for the data elements required to be reported. 

The confidentiality of each reported data element was determined using a two-step approach: (1) 

grouping data elements into 22 data categories (e.g., inputs to emission equations, emissions, and 

 

3

In this action, the EPA is providing an option for Subpart W reporters to delay reporting of six inputs to emission equations for 

two reporting years in specific situations. Refer to section III.A.3 of this preamble for further discussion on this topic.
Page 11 of 186

unit/process operating characteristics that are not inputs to emission equations for direct emitter 

source categories) and (2) making confidentiality determinations either categorically or on the 

basis of individual data elements. Refer to both the July 7, 2010 proposal (75 FR 39097) and the 

May 26, 2011 final rule (76 FR 30785–30786) for more detailed descriptions of this process. 

Refer to the May 26, 2011 final rule also for a discussion of individual data element 

confidentiality determinations. The EPA has established final confidentiality determinations for 

part 98 data elements except those in the “inputs to emission equations” category (May 26, 2011, 

76 FR 30782; August 13, 2012, 77 FR 48072; and August 24, 2012, 77 FR 51477).

4 We 

proposed that “inputs to emission equations” meet the definition of “emission data” under 40 

CFR 2.301(a)(2)(i). Because, under section 114(c) of the CAA, emission data are not entitled to 

confidential treatment, we did not evaluate whether such data elements would qualify as CBI, 

including whether disclosure would likely cause substantial competitive harm to the reporting 

facilities (75 FR 39105 and 39108, July 7, 2010). 

Following our proposal, we received numerous industry comments expressing concerns 

regarding potential disclosure of many of these data elements. In light of the comments, the EPA 

expressed that “these concerns warranted an in-depth evaluation of the potential impact from the 

release of inputs to emission equations” and that the EPA would “complete this evaluation and 

take appropriate final actions regarding inputs to equations before these data elements are 

reported to EPA and potentially be subject to release.” (76 FR 53060, August 25, 2011). In a 

notice dated December 27, 2010, we issued a call for information (75 FR 81354) requesting 

additional information to assist us in conducting our evaluation. To allow sufficient time to 

 

4 There are a small number of data elements (besides data elements categorized as “inputs to emission equations”) for which we 

have not made final confidentiality determinations because we concluded that a determination of confidentiality for the data 

element should be made on a case-by-case facility basis. For example, annual ferroalloy product production capacity in subpart K 

(ferroalloy production), was not assigned a confidentiality determination; see 76 FR 30782, May 26, 2011. 
Page 12 of 186

complete this evaluation through notice and comment, we deferred the reporting deadline for 

data elements assigned to the “inputs to emission equation” category. Reporting of certain of 

these data elements was deferred to March 31, 2013, as specified in Table A-6 to subpart A; and 

reporting of the remainder of these data elements was deferred to March 31, 2015, as specified in 

Table A-7 to subpart A (see the August 25, 2011 final rule, 76 FR 53057).

Our process for the abovementioned evaluation was documented in the final deferral 

notice (76 FR 53057, August 25, 2011) and the accompanying memorandum entitled “Process 

for Evaluating and Potentially Amending Part 98 Inputs to Emission Equations” (Docket ID No. 

EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0929). As discussed in the final deferral notice and memorandum, our 

evaluation involved a four-step process, as follows:

 Step 1: Determine whether each data element assigned to the “inputs to emission 

equations” category is already publicly available.

 Step 2: For data elements assigned to the “inputs to emission equations” category that are 

not publicly available, evaluate whether disclosure of the information is likely to result in 

substantial competitive harm.

 Step 3: For data elements assigned to the “inputs to emission equations” category that are 

likely to cause substantial competitive harm if disclosed, evaluate potential alternative 

calculation methods.

 Step 4: For data elements assigned to the “inputs to emission equations” category that are 

likely to cause substantial competitive harm if disclosed, evaluate potential alternative 

verification methods.

Using each step of the four-step evaluation process, the EPA evaluated data elements for 

which reporting was deferred to March 31, 2015.

5

The results of the evaluation were documented 

 

5 Based on the same four-step process, we also evaluated all data elements for which reporting was deferred to March 31, 2013 

(Table A-6 to Part 98), which did not result in amendments to Part 98. Accordingly, affected facilities were required to report by 

April 1, 2013 these data elements for reporting years 2010 through 2012 and must include them in annual reports for subsequent 

reporting years, as required by Part 98. For a discussion of this evaluation, refer to the EPA’s memorandum “Summary of 

Evaluation of Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) Part 98 “Inputs to Emission Equations” Data Elements Deferred 

Until 2013" (December 17, 2012), available at http://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/documents/pdf/2012/documents/2013-inputsmemo.pdf. In addition, the reporting of the inputs to emission equations in subpart I was addressed by amendments published on 

November 13, 2013 (77 FR 68162).
Page 13 of 186

in the four following memoranda available in the EPA’s Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010-

0929:

 “Evaluation of Public Availability of Inputs to Emission Equations for which Reporting 

was Deferred to March 31, 2015,” August 2013. 

 “Evaluation of Competitive Harm from Disclosure of ‘Inputs to Equations’ Data 

Elements Deferred to March 31, 2015,” August 2013.

 “Evaluation of Alternative Calculation Methods,” August 2013.

 “Evaluation of Alternative Verification Approaches For Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule 

Subparts for which Reporting of Inputs to Emission Equations was Deferred to March 31, 

2015,” August 2013.

Based on the results of this evaluation, the EPA proposed on September 11, 2013 (78 FR 

55994) amendments to the recordkeeping and reporting provisions for 24 subparts of Part 98, 

including an alternative verification approach, to address the inputs to emission equations for 

which disclosure concerns were identified in these subparts. The public comment period for the 

proposed rule amendments was initially scheduled to end on November 12, 2013. The EPA

received requests to extend the public comment period, and the EPA published a notice in the 

Federal Register on November 6, 2013 (78 FR 66674) extending the public comment period to 

November 26, 2013.

In today’s action, the EPA is finalizing the proposed alternative verification approach for 

23 subparts of the GHGRP with some changes from the proposed rule. The EPA had proposed 

amendments but is not taking final action on subpart L inputs to emission equations. Final action 

on subpart L inputs to emission equations will be addressed in a separate rulemaking.6 Responses 

to comments submitted on the proposed amendments can be found in both Section II of this 

preamble and the document “Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule—Revisions to Reporting and 

Recordkeeping Requirements, and Proposed Confidentiality Determinations Under the 

 

6 Accordingly, comments received covering solely topics related to subpart L will be addressed in a separate rulemaking.
Page 14 of 186

Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program: EPA’s Responses to Public Comments” (see Docket ID

No. EPA-HQ–OAR–2010–0929). 

D. Subparts Covered in the Final Rule

The final amendments remove certain reporting requirements and add certain verification 

requirements for all subparts listed in Table 2 of this preamble. Table 2 of this preamble includes 

most of the subparts of Part 98 with inputs to emission equations for which the reporting 

deadline was deferred until 2015. Subpart I is not included in Table 2 of this preamble because 

reporting of the inputs to emission equations for subpart I was addressed by amendments 

published on November 13, 2013 (77 FR 68162). As mentioned above, subpart L is not included 

in Table 2 of this preamble because the EPA’s final decision on reporting of the inputs to 

emission equations for subpart L will be addressed in a separate rulemaking. Subpart II is not 

listed in Table 2 of this preamble because no subpart II inputs to emission equations were 

determined to have disclosure concerns, so no subpart II inputs are removed from reporting

under today’s amendment. Subpart W is excluded from Table 2 of this preamble as well, because 

no inputs to emission equations in subpart W are being removed from reporting. Refer to the 

memorandum “Final Evaluation of Competitive Harm from Disclosure of ‘Inputs to Equations’ 

Data Elements Deferred to March 31, 2015,” September 2014 (refer to Docket ID No. EPA-HQOAR-2010-0929) for discussions about the EPA’s harm analysis results for subparts W and II. 

Refer to Section II.B of this preamble for a discussion of amendments to subpart W.

Additionally, parts of these final rule amendments affect subparts not listed in Table 2 of this 

preamble. Specifically, for owners or operators of facilities subject to both a subpart listed in 

Table 2 of this preamble and a subpart of Part 98 not listed in Table 2 of this preamble, the 

amended recordkeeping duration applies to the facility’s records required for all Part 98 subparts 
Page 15 of 186

(to which the reporter is subject). Refer to Sections II.C and III.B of the proposal preamble for 

further discussion of this recordkeeping amendment (78 FR 55994, September 11, 2013).

Additionally, owners or operators of facilities reporting under subparts E, H, O, Q, W, Y, AA, 

CC, and II, as well as certain owners and operators reporting under subpart C, must report inputs 

to emission equations for which reporting was deferred to 2015 and disclosure concerns were not 

identified for reporting years 2010 through 2013 in the reporting year 2014 annual report.

7 Refer 

to Section III.A.3 of the proposal preamble for further discussion of this reporting amendment

(78 FR 55994, September 11, 2013).

Table 2—Subparts Affected by the Final Amendments Removing Certain Reporting and 

Adding Certain Verification Requirementsa

Subpart

C—General Stationary Fuel Combustion—

Stationary fuel combustion sources (e.g., 

individual units, aggregations of units, common 

pipes, or common stacks) excluding those that 

contain at least one combustion unit connected to 

a fuel-fired electric generator owned or operated 

by an entity that is subject to regulation of 

customer billing rates by the public utility 

commission (PUC) (excluding generators 

connected to combustion units subject to 40 CFR 

part 98, subpart D) and that are located at a 

facility for which the sum of the nameplate 

capacities for all such electric generators is greater 

than or equal to 1 megawatt electric output.

b,c

U—Miscellaneous Uses of Carbonate

E—Adipic Acid Production V—Nitric Acid Production

F—Aluminum Production X—Petrochemical Production

G—Ammonia Manufacturing Y—Petroleum Refineries

H—Cement Production Z—Phosphoric Acid Production

K—Ferroalloy Production AA—Pulp and Paper Manufacturing

N—Glass Production BB—Silicon Carbide Production

 

7

For six data elements in subpart W, reporting of the data for reporting year 2013 may be delayed until reporting year 2015 in 

specific cases. Refer to section II.B.2 of this preamble for further discussion of this optional reporting delay. Further, final action 

on the inputs to emission equations whose reporting deadline was deferred until 2015 in Subpart L will be addressed in a separate 

rulemaking.
Page 16 of 186

Subpart

O—HCFC-22 Production and HFC-23 

Destruction

CC—Soda Ash Manufacturing

P—Hydrogen Production EE—Titanium Dioxide Production

Q—Iron and Steel Production GG—Zinc Production

R—Lead Production TT—Industrial Waste Landfills

S—Lime Manufacturing

a This final action does not remove reporting requirements or require use of IVT for any reported GHG value for 

which the reporter uses a continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS) or an EPA-approved alternative 

method—as allowed under 40 CFR 98.33(a)(5), 98.53(a)(2), and 98.223(a)(2)—to calculate the reported GHG 

value, rather than using inputs to emission equations for which reporting was deferred to March 31, 2015, and 

the associated EPA-provided calculation methodologies to calculate the reported GHG value.

b

Includes one deferred input to an emission equations, 40 CFR 98.3(d)(3)(v), which is specified in subpart A of 

Part 98 and applies to only certain reporters under subpart C.

c These subpart C sources may elect to report inputs to emission equations rather than use IVT.

E. Legal Authority

The EPA is amending Part 98 under its existing CAA authority provided in CAA section 

114. As stated in the preamble to the 2009 final GHG reporting rule (74 FR 56260, October 30, 

2009), CAA section 114(a)(1) provides the EPA broad authority to require the information to be 

reported by this rule because such data would inform and are relevant to the EPA’s carrying out 

a wide variety of CAA provisions. See the preambles to the proposed (74 FR 16448, April 10, 

2009) and final Part 98 (74 FR 56260, October 30, 2009) for further information.

In addition, pursuant to sections 114, 301, and 307 of the CAA, the EPA has established

final confidentiality determinations for the new data elements required by this amendment. 

Section 114(c) of the CAA requires that the EPA make publicly available information obtained 

under CAA section 114, except for information (excluding emission data) that qualifies for 

confidential treatment. The Administrator has determined that this action (Part 98 amendment 

and confidentiality determinations) is subject to the provisions of CAA section 307(d).

II. Summary of Final Amendments to Part 98
Page 17 of 186

The EPA is finalizing the proposed alternative verification approach for the GHGRP, 

with some changes made in response to public comments. A detailed description of the 

alternative verification approach is available in the preamble to the proposed rule (78 FR 55994, 

September 11, 2013). Additionally, the EPA is finalizing its CBI determinations for the new 

reporting elements added to Part 98 in this action, with changes made in response to public 

comments.

This section of the preamble describes the final amendments to Part 98, organized 

according to the following four general areas:

 Addition of a requirement for facilities subject to the subparts listed in Table 2 of this 

preamble to use IVT to enter 324 inputs to emission equations into IVT for which 

reporting was deferred to 2015 and for which disclosure concerns were identified. 

 Removal of the requirement to report 378 inputs to emission equations for which 

reporting was deferred to 2015 and for which disclosure concerns were identified.

8

 Revision of recordkeeping requirements for facilities required to use IVT. 

 Addition of new reporting elements for certain facilities required to use IVT.

These four areas of final amendments are described in more detail in Sections II.A 

through II.D of this preamble. Specifically, each of these sections includes a summary of final 

amendments, a summary of major changes since proposal, and a summary of the major 

comments and the EPA’s responses thereto. The comment response document (Docket ID. No.

EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0929) includes a complete listing of all comments received on the 

proposed rule (78 FR 55994, September 11, 2013) and the EPA’s responses. 

Additional rationale for these amendments is available in the preamble to the proposed 

rule (78 FR 55994, September 11, 2013).

 

8 As mentioned above, there are 378 equation inputs for which reporting was deferred to 2015 and for which the EPA determined 

there are disclosure concerns, and 324 of these equation inputs must be entered into IVT. Fifty-four of the 378 equation inputs do 

not need to be entered into IVT because these equation inputs are redundant to other equations inputs being entered into IVT or 

are otherwise not needed for verification.
Page 18 of 186

The final amendments also include minor changes from the proposed rule that harmonize

regulatory text to be consistent with other provisions in 40 CFR part 98, clarify regulatory text, 

and correct minor errors in the proposal. These changes are described in the memorandum 

“Summary and Explanation of Minor Changes Since the Proposed Rule” (Docket ID No. EPAHQ-OAR-2010-0929).

A. Addition of a Requirement for Certain Reporters to Use an Inputs Verification Tool (IVT) to 

Enter Certain Data Elements

1. Summary of Final Amendments to Part 98

The EPA is finalizing the proposed requirement that IVT be used by facilities subject to 

the subparts listed in Table 2 of this preamble, with some exceptions for certain subpart C 

sources, as further discussed in Section II.A.2 of this preamble. Most commenters generally 

supported use of IVT as an effective method for verifying emissions. Using entered inputs to 

emission equations, IVT calculates the equation results, conducts electronic verification checks 

on the inputs, and generates a verification summary, as follows. IVT will be deployed within the 

Electronic Greenhouse Gas Reporting Tool (e-GGRT) and will be integrated without interrupting 

the current electronic reporting process. Reporters will enter data into e-GGRT that are required 

to be reported in the annual report, and will also enter into e-GGRT (via IVT) the inputs to 

emission equations for which reporting is no longer required under the amendments. IVT will 

use these entered data to calculate the equation results, conduct electronic verification checks on 

the entered inputs to emission equations, and generate a verification summary that informs the 

EPA about the verification results without specifying the entered inputs to emission equations. 

IVT will not retain the entered inputs to emission equations, which will not be electronically 

accessible to the EPA during their entry or anytime thereafter. Instead, the EPA will rely on the 
Page 19 of 186

verification summary, which will become accessible to the EPA after annual report submittal, 

and other follow-up verification procedures described in the proposed rule for conducting 

verification. Sources subject to multiple subparts under Part 98 are required to use IVT for only 

those subparts listed in Table 2 of this preamble. Reporters must use IVT starting with reporting 

year 2014. A detailed description of IVT and these requirements is provided in the proposal 

preamble (78 FR 55994, September 11, 2013), the memorandum “Technical Approach and 

Design for Inputs Verification Tool,” August 2013 (refer to Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–

2010–0929), and Section II.A.3 of this preamble.

The inputs to emission equations required to be entered into IVT are specified in the 

“verification software records” provisions in the recordkeeping section of each subpart specified

in Table 2 of this preamble.

Subpart C sources (e.g., individual units, aggregations of units, common pipes, or 

common stacks) that do not meet the following criteria have the option to use IVT or to report 

these deferred inputs to emission equations for which reporting was deferred to 2015: contain at 

least one combustion unit connected to a fuel-fired electric generator owned or operated by an 

entity that is subject to regulation of customer billing rates by the public utility commission 

(PUC) (excluding generators connected to combustion units subject to 40 CFR part 98, subpart 

D) and are located at a facility for which the sum of the nameplate capacities for all such electric 

generators is greater than or equal to 1 megawatt electric output . For those sources who choose 

to report their inputs to emission equations, e-GGRT will require the reporters to waive the right 

to make confidentiality claims before they can be reported via e-GGRT.

2. Summary of Changes Since Proposal
Page 20 of 186

This section provides a brief summary of changes to the requirement to use IVT since 

proposal. The EPA’s rationale for these changes is provided in Section II.A.3 of this preamble as 

part of the EPA’s response to the related comment(s). 

The changes to the proposed requirement to use IVT are as follows:

 The EPA has revised one of the criteria in 40 CFR 98.36(f) that specifies which 

stationary fuel combustion sources (e.g., individual units, aggregations of units, common 

pipes, or common stacks) subject to subpart C of part 98 are required to report inputs to 

emission equations for which reporting was deferred to 2015. At proposal, 40 CFR 

98.36(f)(1) was as follows: the stationary combustion source contains at least one 

combustion unit connected to a fuel-fired electric generator granted access by the Public 

Utilities Commission to deliver power to the local or regional power grid (excluding 

generators that are connected to combustion units that are subject to subpart D of this 

part).” In the final rule, this criterion is revised as follows: “the stationary fuel 

combustion source contains at least one combustion unit connected to a fuel-fired electric 

generator that is owned or operated by an entity that is subject to regulation of customer 

billing rates by the public utility commission (excluding generators that are connected to 

combustion units that are subject to subpart D of this part).”

 For sources that do not meet the criteria specified in 40 CFR 98.36(f), the EPA has added

an option in 40 CFR 98.3(d)(3)(v) and 40 CFR 98.36(a) to either elect to use IVT or, if 

potential disclosure is not a concern to the reporters, to report these inputs to emission 

equations. For reporting year 2014, if a subpart C source elects not to use IVT, the source 

is required to report their subpart C inputs to emission equations for which reporting was 

deferred to 2015 for reporting years 2010 through 2014 in the reporting year 2014 annual 

report. If this source is not required to use IVT for other subparts listed in Table 2 of this 

preamble, the source would not be subject to the extended recordkeeping requirements of 

5 years.

9

 The EPA has revised the proposed amendments to 40 CFR 98.5(b) to add an option for 

reporters subject to using IVT to enter an explanation into IVT in cases where IVT has 

produced a warning message for an entered data value (e.g., the value is outside the 

EPA’s expected range), but the reporter believes that the data value is accurate as entered.

 The EPA has revised its method for specifying which inputs to emission equations must 

be entered into IVT. At proposal, 40 CFR 98.5(b) indicated which inputs to emission 

equations must be entered into IVT by referring to equations specified in proposed Table 

A-8 of Part 98. In the final rule, the EPA identifies the inputs to emission equations that 

must be entered into IVT in a “verification software records” provision in the 

recordkeeping section of each affected subpart. Therefore, proposed Table A-8 is not 

included in the final rule. Refer to Section II.C of this preamble for further discussion of 

these “verification software records” provisions.

 

9

If the source is required to use IVT for other subparts, the source must retain records for all subparts (including subpart C) for a 

period of 5 years.
Page 21 of 186

Additionally, in response to public comments, the EPA is making changes related to 

implementation of the alternative verification approach. These changes do not involve regulatory

amendments to Part 98, but do improve the design and use of the IVT and address questions and 

concerns raised by commenters. A summary of these changes follows.

IVT Testing. The EPA will provide an opportunity well in advance of the March 2015 

reporting deadline for stakeholders to test and provide feedback to the EPA on IVT for the 23

subparts addressed in this final action via a compliance assistance open testing period, or

“sandbox.” Refer to Section II.A.3 of this preamble for a description of “sandbox” testing and 

further discussion of this opportunity. The EPA encourages all stakeholders to participate in the 

sandbox testing because this testing will provide a valuable opportunity for reporters to preview 

and familiarize themselves with the new application for all applicable subparts before the open 

reporting period begins, typically in mid-February. The EPA intends to offer sandbox testing 

from October through December 2014, providing testing by subpart on a rolling basis. 

Participants who identify an error in IVT will have the opportunity to provide feedback to the 

EPA regarding their IVT testing experience. Such feedback will ensure a higher quality IVT for 

reporting in early 2015 and subsequent years. For details on the sandbox testing, including a 

schedule of when testing will occur for each of the 23 subparts, please see 

http://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/reporters/training/inputs-verifier.html.

IVT Design. In response to commenter input, the EPA has revised the IVT design to 

improve the ease of use and the efficiency of the data entry process, instructions, help screens, 

warnings, and error messages. Refer to Section II.A.3 of this preamble for further discussion of 

these revisions. See the EPA’s comment response document in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
Page 22 of 186

2010-0929 for a list of all public comments regarding additional improvements to IVT and the 

EPA’s responses, including revisions to address errors identified by commenters.

3. Summary of Comments and Responses

This section provides a brief summary of the significant comments received in response 

to the proposed requirement to use IVT, and the EPA’s responses. The EPA’s comment response 

document in Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0929 provides a complete listing of all 

related comments and the EPA’s responses.

Comment: One commenter asserted that the verification approach that the EPA has used 

during the deferral period has been successful, is efficient, and should be adopted as EPA’s 

permanent approach for verification, rather than requiring facilities to use IVT. The commenter 

asserted that, during this deferral period, verification checks have been conducted through eGGRT on data that have been reported to the EPA. The commenter believes that while the EPA 

has identified reporting errors during these years, such concerns will become increasingly rare as 

reporters become more familiar with and are able to streamline the reporting process. The 

commenter asserted that in situations where the EPA is not able to verify the data, the EPA can 

continue to follow-up with facilities. The commenter also asserted that the interim verification 

approach used by the EPA has strong parallels to other “certification” requirements that the EPA 

has long deemed sufficient to ensure compliance in similar circumstances. Finally, the 

commenter asserted that because the interim verification approach has been successful, the risk 

of entering CBI into an unproven system that has the potential to be insecure is not justified.

Response: As the commenter notes, the EPA has been conducting verification checks 

using data other than inputs to emission equations. Although the checks to date gave us some 

confidence in the submitted data, the verification approach being finalized in this action allows 
Page 23 of 186

for more precise checks to be conducted and therefore a more robust verification approach. 

Specifically, requiring that the inputs to emission equations (for which disclosure concerns were 

identified) be entered into IVT allows the tool to verify reported emissions by calculating the 

emission equation results as well as conducting verification checks on the entered inputs to 

emission equations. These checks are designed to ensure that calculations are performed 

correctly by the reporter and that appropriate data were used to calculate emissions. While the 

EPA agrees that over time, commenters will become more familiar with e-GGRT and IVT and 

the increased familiarity may help to reduce reporting errors, it is important that the Agency’s 

verification process is as robust as it can be to ensure the accuracy of the submitted data. The 

verification approach finalized in this action will accomplish that goal while at the same time 

addressing the concerns regarding potential disclosure of sensitive information.

Regarding the comment that the verification approach used during the deferral period is 

similar to “other certification requirements that the EPA has long deemed sufficient to ensure 

compliance in similar circumstances,” it is not clear which programs to which the commenter is 

referring. As the EPA stated in the memorandum “Evaluation of Alternative Verification

Approaches For Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule Subparts for which Reporting of Inputs to 

Emission Equations was Deferred to March 31, 2015” (EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0929- 0048), the 

EPA considered the verification approach used by the EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) 

program, which requires self-certification that the information reported is accurate, and includes 

electronic data checks and follow-up conducted by the EPA. However, the TRI is a different type 

of program than the GHGRP in that it does not require specific monitoring and calculation 

approaches, but rather requires that estimates be based on the best available information. In 

contrast, the GHGRP prescribes a set of specific calculation methods, or equations, for individual 
Page 24 of 186

source categories, processes, and emission units, so that data collected from multiple facilities 

are consistent and comparable. Given the additional specification required by the GHGRP, the 

EPA concluded that the more precise checks that will be conducted by IVT are warranted.

The EPA addresses the comment about IVT’s security and the assertion that the system is 

unproven later in this section of the preamble.

Comment: One commenter expressed concern regarding the language used in 40 CFR 

98.36(f)(1), indicating that the language is vague and confusing. The commenter stated that the 

phrase “granted access by the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to deliver power to the local or 

regional electric power grid” could result in confusion or overly-broad reporting of CBI. The 

commenter explained that some jurisdictions impose only registration and other ministerial 

requirements on units granted access; whereas some jurisdictions “engage in direct price and 

other regulation of vertically integrated and other utility operations that grant or restrict franchise 

rights.” The commenter cautioned that it is not clear what level of regulation constitutes a “grant 

of access” under the rule, explaining that all units, regardless of type or regulatory regime, 

require “access” to a local or regional grid in some form to make off-site sales of power.

The commenter recommended that the EPA avoid misinterpretation of 40 CFR 98.36(f) 

by clarifying in the final rule that only units subject to regulation as “public utilities under the 

laws and regulations of a given state” (as opposed to those under other Federal regulations or not 

otherwise subject to State utility commission oversight of operations and rates as “public 

utilities”) should be considered as having been “granted access by the Public Utilities 

Commission to deliver power to the local or regional electric power grid.” The commenter also 

stated that it is incorrect to assume that information provided to PUCs or similar institutions is 
Page 25 of 186

also disclosed publicly, and that the EPA should clarify how it will address such information if 

the PUC treats that information as CBI or it is otherwise not available to the public. 

Response: For the reasons stated below, the EPA agrees that the proposed 40 CFR 

98.36(f)(1) does not clearly define the combustion units that must report subpart C inputs to 

emission equations for which reporting was deferred to 2015. Proposed 40 CFR 98.36(f) 

specified the following criteria: “(1) The stationary combustion source contains at least one 

combustion unit connected to a fuel-fired electric generator that has been granted access by the 

Public Utilities Commission to deliver power to the local or regional electric power grid

(excluding generators that are connected to combustion units that are subject to subpart D of this 

part); and (2) The stationary fuel combustion source is located at a facility for which the sum of

the nameplate capacities for all electric generators specified in paragraph (f)(1) of this section is 

greater than or equal to 1 megawatt electric output.”

10 As indicated in the memorandum, 

“Evaluation of Competitive Harm from Disclosure of ‘Inputs to Equations’ Data Elements 

Deferred to March 31, 2015,” August 2013 (refer to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0929), 

the EPA had found no disclosure concerns for any combustion source meeting the proposed 

criteria in 40 CFR 98.36(f)(1), including combustion sources owned or operated both by power 

producers whose primary purpose is selling electricity and by power producers whose primary 

purpose is not selling electricity. It was the EPA’s understanding at the time that both types of 

power producers are granted access to the grid by the PUC, that such grant requires that the 

associated consumer billing rates be regulated by PUCs and that, therefore, the power producers 

experience a high level of transparency due to the practice of the owner or operator disclosing

fuel costs to the PUC through ratemaking procedures. Based on the above understanding, the 

 

10 We received no comment on the proposed criterion (2), and we are therefore finalizing that criterion as proposed.
Page 26 of 186

EPA had concluded that releasing these data would not reveal any proprietary information about 

facility or process performance, design, and operation; cost to do business; raw material usage; 

or production. 

In light of the comment above, the EPA further investigated the reporting obligations of 

the owner or operators of power producers to PUCs. Based on these investigations, the EPA 

established that the PUC does not typically grant access to the grid, but sometimes requires 

utilities to grant other power producers access to the grid. The EPA recognized that not all power 

producers that are granted access to the grid are subject to regulation of rates by PUCs, and 

therefore some of these power producers do not experience the high level of transparency that 

would be associated with the disclosure of fuel costs to the PUC through ratemaking procedures.

As a result, the EPA cannot conclude that there would be no disclosure concerns associated with 

the release of these data for power producers based on their connectivity to the grid, given that 

some power producers connected to the grid are not subject to regulation of rates by the PUC.

The new understanding and resulting harm analysis described above are also reflected in the 

memorandum “Final Evaluation of Competitive Harm from Disclosure of ‘Inputs to Equations’ 

Data Elements Deferred to March 31, 2015,” September 2014 (refer to Docket ID No. EPA-HQOAR-2010-0929). Given that the EPA found no disclosure concerns with respect to those power 

producers subject to regulatory oversight of consumer billing rates by a PUC, the EPA has 

changed proposed 40 CFR 98.36(f)(1) in the final rule to more clearly and accurately describe 

the combustion units that must report as those units owned or operated by an entity that is subject 

to regulation of customer billing rates by the public utility commission. Power producers subject 

to regulatory oversight of consumer billing rates by a PUC include investor-owned utilities 

(IOUs) (i.e., the most common type of utility regulated by PUCs), non-utility generators, and 
Page 27 of 186

consumer-owned utilities (COUs) that are subject to regulation of customer billing rates by a 

PUC. Because industrial plants that generate electricity are not subject to regulation of customer 

billing rates by a PUC, power producers owned or operated by industrial plants would not meet 

this revised reporting criterion in 40 CFR 98.36(f)(1). 

The commenter recommended replacing the proposed language “granted access by the 

PUC to deliver power to the grid” with “subject to regulation as a public utility under the laws 

and regulations of a given state.” The terminology “public utility” could be interpreted to refer 

only to COUs, which are sometimes called “public power,” but excluding IOUs, which would 

not be appropriate because IOUs are subject to regulatory oversight of consumer billing rates by 

a PUC and therefore experience a high level of transparency. Also, the commenter’s suggested 

phrase “under the laws and regulations of a given state” could be interpreted as meaning any 

state law or regulation, regardless of whether they are associated with PUCs. Given that virtually 

all facilities generating electricity are governed to some degree by other state laws and 

regulations, and those regulated by the PUC might not be regulated for ratemaking purposes, this 

suggested text would expand the reporting requirement beyond those facilities subject to 

regulation of rates by the PUC, which is the basis for our finding of transparency. Accordingly, 

the EPA has determined that the rule text suggested by the commenter was overly broad. The 

EPA has determined that the text “owned by an entity subject to regulation of customer billing 

rates by a public utility commission” more accurately describes the power producers for which 

we found no disclosure concerns and therefore must report the subpart C inputs to emission 

equations for which reporting was deferred until 2015.

The EPA agrees with the comment that not all information that is provided to PUCs may 

necessarily be made available to the public; however, the EPA believes that power producers
Page 28 of 186

subject to regulation of rates by PUCs generally experience a high level of transparency. The 

EPA has received no comment refuting the high level of transparency or stating that there are 

disclosure concerns associated with these subpart C inputs to emission equations. The final 

criterion (“subject to regulation of customer billing rates by PUCs”) was formulated to capture 

power producers that are utilities in states with so-called “regulated” electricity markets. In these 

states, power producers are generally owned by vertically integrated utilities, which operate as 

monopolies and sell power to customers at rates that are established through PUC proceedings. 

Given this monopolistic market for power producers subject to regulation of rates by PUCs, the

EPA does not identify any disclosure concerns with reporting the inputs to emission equations in 

subpart C for reporters that meet the final criterion. In contrast, in “deregulated” or 

“restructured” states that have unbundled generation and delivery, independent power producers 

may compete to sell electricity, which is then delivered through a regulated distribution utility. 

These independent producers are not subject to PUC ratemaking procedures, and they will 

therefore not be required to report subpart C inputs to emission equation data for their 

combustion units. For the reasons stated above, the EPA concludes that clarifying the scope of 

the criteria to be those power producers that are subject to regulation of customer billing rates by 

PUCs accurately specifies facilities identified as having no disclosure concerns with the release 

of these data.

Specifically, the final 40 CFR 98.36(f) provides the following criteria to indicate which 

stationary fuel combustion sources (e.g., individual unit, aggregation of units, common pipe, or 

common stack) must report their inputs to emission equations for which reporting was deferred 

to 2015: “(1) The stationary fuel combustion source contains at least one combustion unit 

connected to a fuel-fired electric generator owned or operated by an entity that is subject to 
Page 29 of 186

regulation of customer billing rates by the public utility commission (excluding generators that 

are connected to combustion units that are subject to subpart D of this part); and (2) The 

stationary fuel combustion source is located at a facility for which the sum of the nameplate 

capacities for all electric generators specified in paragraph (f)(1) of this section is greater than or 

equal to 1 megawatt electric output.” For any stationary fuel combustion source subject to 

subpart C that does not meet these criteria, the final rule provides an option for the source either 

to use IVT starting in reporting year 2014 or to report these data to the EPA, including reporting 

the data specified in revised Table A-7 for reporting years 2010 through 2013.11 Refer to the 

comment summary and the EPA’s response immediately following this response for further 

discussion about this new option.

Comment: Three commenters asserted that the EPA not require them to use IVT. They 

asserted that reporters under subpart HH (municipal solid waste landfills) have not expressed 

disclosure concerns regarding inputs to equations during comment periods for previous 

rulemakings, and that the proposal did not take this into consideration as it did not include an 

option to allow reporters to submit data to the EPA rather than use IVT. They further asserted 

that under the proposal, they would be required to use IVT for only a single equation input 

(quantity of fuel combusted under subpart C, Tier 1), and that the burden to their industry 

associated with use of IVT is not warranted, given that the single equation input is associated 

with less than 1 percent of reported GHG emissions from the industry. The commenters 

expressed concern that imposing the proposed requirements associated with IVT on landfills 

would be burdensome, and indicated that they would be willing to report the single data element 

 

11 As discussed above, the e-GGRT will require that such reporter waive any confidentiality claim for its facility’s inputs to 

emission equations before such data can be entered into e-GGRT. 
Page 30 of 186

to the EPA. They recommended that the EPA exclude Tier 1 reporters from being required to use 

IVT. 

Response: The IVT requirements in the final amendments for subpart C, which covers a 

wide range of industries, address disclosure concerns identified for certain “inputs to emission 

equations” data elements. However, these commenters expressed that they do not have disclosure 

concerns with their fuel use data, the single input required for Tier 1 reporting under subpart C. 

For these commenters who are not concerned with reporting their fuel use quantity under subpart 

C, the EPA sees no reason to insist that they use IVT instead of reporting such data. In addition, 

the fact that these commenters have not identified disclosure concerns with any inputs to 

equations suggests that it is likely that landfills using other subpart C calculation methods 

besides Tier 1 may similarly prefer to report inputs to emission equations data elements under 

subpart C instead of using the IVT. Further, given the wide range of industries reporting under 

subpart C, it is possible that there are other industries that do not have disclosure concerns with 

fuel quantity and other equation inputs for subpart C calculation methods. For any such subpart 

C reporter, the EPA similarly sees no reason to insist that it use IVT instead of reporting such 

data. Accordingly, the EPA is revising 40 CFR 98.36 to make it optional for subpart C sources 

that do not meet the criteria for electric generators in 40 CFR 98.36(f)12 to use IVT. As such, 

under the final rule, a subpart C reporter, except for those meeting the criteria of 40 CFR 

98.36(f), who does not have disclosure concerns for the subpart C inputs to emission equation 

data elements may waive confidentiality claims and report such data instead of using IVT. 

Before e-GGRT will accept entry of these inputs to emission equations data, it will require that 

the reporter waive confidentiality claims of such data. 

 

12 Sources meeting the criteria in 40 CFR 98.36(f) must report their subpart C inputs to emission equations that were deferred 

from reporting until 2015.
Page 31 of 186

If a subpart C source elects to report these data for reporting year 2014, the source is 

required to report these data for reporting years 2010 through 2013 as part of the reporting year 

2014 annual report. If a source elects to use IVT in reporting year 2014, and then the source 

elects in a future year to report these data, the reporter will not be obligated to report these data

for any prior year.

Comment: Six commenters recommended that the EPA allow reporters time to test IVT

prior to the start of reporting for reporting year 2014, using a fully functional “sandbox” testing 

environment similar to that used previously for e-GGRT testing. These commenters urged the 

EPA to allow sandbox testing for each affected subpart, arguing that the subpart X prototype 

developed for commenter review at proposal allowed them to review only the design and 

functionality of the prototype for subpart X. They stressed that additional testing is necessary to 

ensure IVT works for all affected subparts. Two commenters noted that sandbox testing would 

allow errors in the software to be found and corrected prior to implementation. Commenters also 

noted that sandbox testing of each subpart would enable them to determine whether IVT

calculates emission equation results correctly and stated that sandbox testing would provide an 

opportunity for reporters to compare results of the calculations in IVT against the values 

calculated using the optional calculation spreadsheets. Other commenters requested sandbox 

testing because it would allow them to review and comment on the verification ranges 

incorporated in IVT. One commenter stated that testing could provide important information that 

may result in improvements to IVT that obviate the need for reporters to over-ride error 

messages. Other commenters expressed concern about protection of CBI and concluded that 

rigorous testing of each affected subpart is critical to ensuring confidential data are protected. 
Page 32 of 186

Four commenters recommended that the EPA allow sandbox testing of the XML version 

of IVT. These commenters noted that the pilot IVT provided very limited testing for reporters 

using the XML option. They noted that the testing was limited to only one subpart, that only one 

sample XML file was provided for testing, and that the EPA did not provide the XML schema.

Two commenters requested that the EPA provide additional time for reporters to review and test 

the XML IVT for each subpart. The complexity of the XML option, they argue, makes thorough 

testing of any XML schema essential.

Eight commenters asserted that the pilot tool available during the comment period for the 

subpart X mass balance methodology was too limited, and as a result provided limited value in 

assessing the burden of the tool for the other methodologies and subparts that would be required 

to use the tool. Two of these commenters noted that because subpart X has different inputs to 

equation data elements and equations than other subparts, they were unable to provide adequate 

feedback on the tool during the comment period. Two of these commenters suggested that the 

EPA develop a pilot reporting tool for their subpart of interest, and re-propose the verification 

tool for that subpart to provide ample opportunity to provide public comment on the burden 

associated with the use of the tool. Three of these commenters asserted that because the pilot 

testing for subpart X was limited to the mass balance methodology, it provided limited value to 

assess the ease of use and burden of the tool for the other methodologies within subpart X. 

Two commenters indicated that reporters need more time in 2015 to complete their 

annual reports than in previous years. One commenter stated that in the past, the EPA has 

provided industry just a handful of weeks before the reporting deadline to update all of its data 

systems, input all of its data into e-GGRT, correct any errors, complete internal reviews of the 

reports, and to submit the reports. The commenter noted that the short timeframe was extremely 
Page 33 of 186

challenging in past years. Both commenters indicated that it would be unacceptable for the EPA 

to provide another short timeframe in 2015, considering the new requirements to back-report 

2010 through 2013 data and use the new IVT. One commenter requested that the inputs 

verification tool be fully functional by January 1, 2015 to allow reporters to undergo the required 

software development so that their systems accurately “sync” with the new version of e-GGRT.

The commenter suggested that the EPA include language in Subpart A to indicate that for each

day past January 1, 2015 that the upgraded e-GGRT is not available, the reporting deadline will 

be extended by one day.

Response: During the public comment period, the EPA provided a subpart X prototype 

for testing and comment. This prototype allowed reporters to review the overall design, structure, 

and functionality of IVT, which applies to all subparts that are to use the tool. It was not 

necessary to have a prototype for every subpart during the open comment period because the 

overall design of IVT is the same irrespective of the specific methodologies, or equations, in 

each subpart. Specifically, the tool demonstrated the following functions that apply to all 

subparts that are to use the tool: how IVT functions within e-GGRT, how to navigate from eGGRT to IVT and vice versa, how inputs are entered into IVT, how IVT calculates equation 

results based on the inputs to emission equations entered, how an emission equation result 

calculated in IVT is transferred to the annual reporting form in e-GGRT, how the reporter may 

override an emission value calculated by IVT, how the results of the verification checks 

conducted in IVT appear in the verification summary, how a reporter may enter inputs to 

emission equations into IVT over multiple e-GGRT sessions without having to start over each 

time the reporter logs out of e-GGRT (by saving them on their local computer), and how to use 

the XML bulk upload feature rather than using webforms. Reporters were also able to generate 
Page 34 of 186

the list of inputs entered into IVT that must be kept as a record, view the format of the records 

file created, and test the downloading of the records file for recordkeeping purposes. These 

features that were available for testing represent all of the key functions of IVT. Comments on 

any of the above features received during the public comment period would apply to all subparts 

that are required to use IVT and not just the subpart X prototype. The feedback assisted the EPA 

in determining improvements to the design and functionality of IVT for all subparts with the IVT 

requirement. 

Although providing IVT for all subparts during the comment period was not necessary, 

the EPA agrees with the commenters that both the EPA and reporters would benefit from the 

opportunity to test IVT for all applicable subparts prior to the beginning of reporting for 

reporting year 2014. Accordingly, the EPA will offer reporters an opportunity prior to the 

beginning of the reporting year 2014 open reporting period (which is typically in mid-February) 

to view and provide feedback on the IVT modules for all 23 subparts listed in Table 2 of this 

preamble. The EPA will use a sandbox testing environment similar to that used previously for eGGRT testing. The EPA intends to offer sandbox testing from October through December 2014, 

providing testing by subpart on a rolling basis. For details on the sandbox testing, including a 

schedule of when testing will occur for each of the 23 subparts, please see

http://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/reporters/training/inputs-verifier.html. We are confident that 

this sandbox testing period will provide reporters the time needed to sync their systems with IVT 

prior to the open reporting period for reporting year 2014, and submit their reports by March 31, 

2015.

As previously provided for in the 2010 sandbox for testing of e-GGRT, the sandbox 

environment for IVT will provide participants an opportunity to try IVT functions for all 23 
Page 35 of 186

subparts, including navigating between IVT screens, entering data, testing the XML uploading 

option (saving XML files to local drives, and uploading XML files to IVT), checking the built-in 

calculation algorithms, and accessing Help content. Participants will be assigned a test facility 

for which they will be able to enter mock data for any IVT subpart module they wish to test. 

Sandbox participants may notify the EPA should they identify an error, bug, or technical 

glitch in IVT. The EPA plans to conduct extensive testing to ensure that IVT calculates the 

emissions correctly for all subparts; however, should any calculation or other subpart-specific 

errors remain, these can be detected during the sandbox period and addressed prior to the open 

reporting period. Because extensive internal testing will have been conducted prior to the

compliance assistance “sandbox” being made available, the EPA does not anticipate major issues 

during the sandbox period that cannot be addressed prior to the open reporting period.

Regarding the comment that additional time is needed due to the back-reporting of a 

significant amount of information, the EPA notes that, with the exception of subpart W, only a 

handful of inputs to equations in each subpart must be back-reported for years 2010 through 

2013 (i.e., reporters typically will have no more than 10 inputs to equations in each of these 

subparts to report for these years.) Further, as discussed above, because the system will have 

gone through extensive testing followed by an IVT sandbox period for reporters to sync their 

systems with IVT before it is opened for reporting, we are confident that the reporters will have 

sufficient time to submit their reports, including back reporting a small number of inputs for 

reporting years 2010 through 2013. For subpart W, which has a substantial number of inputs to 

be back-reported to the EPA for these years, the EPA plans to use a spreadsheet to collect this 

data, and anticipates publishing the spreadsheet in October 2014. This will allow facilities to 

begin data entry into the spreadsheet prior to the open reporting period. The spreadsheet can then 
Page 36 of 186

be uploaded to e-GGRT during the open reporting season. Refer to Section II.B.1 of this 

preamble for a discussion of the timing of entering inputs to emission equations for reporting 

years 2011 through 2013 for subpart W. In light of the extensive testing and the sandbox period, 

which will allow reporters to sync their systems with IVT prior to the open reporting period, and 

the EPA’s plans to make the subpart W spreadsheet for 2010 through 2013 available in October, 

we have determined that the typical reporting period of approximately six weeks is sufficient. 

As requested by commenters, sandbox participants may provide input on the ranges that 

the EPA has identified for the reasonable range verification checks on the inputs entered into 

IVT. As is the case for all expected range checks used as part of the electronic verification 

process, the EPA will set initial ranges and will continually refine ranges as additional 

information is obtained. Should the EPA receive feedback on expected range checks during the 

sandbox period, the EPA will review the feedback and adjust the ranges prior to the open 

reporting period as appropriate. Also, as is the case for all expected range checks conducted in eGGRT, the reporter may enter any value into IVT regardless of the reasonable range. The 

expected ranges are not used by the EPA as a final determination regarding data quality or 

compliance; rather, they are used as a first step of the verification process and are further 

investigated. Finally, as is discussed in more detail later in this section of this preamble, during 

the reporting process, the reporter will have the opportunity to add a comment to the EPA 

associated with individual verification warnings in IVT. As a result, if reporters feel that an 

explanation is needed as to why a particular range was exceeded or that the range within IVT 

needs to be adjusted, they may do so as part of the annual reporting process.

Regarding the comments on the XML upload reporting option, the EPA notes that during 

the public comment period, we published an XML schema for the IVT prototype, as well as two 
Page 37 of 186

sample files to be used with the prototype, an XML Inputs Verifier file and an XML Annual 

Report File. The sandbox that will be available for IVT will also include this XML upload 

reporting option. For subparts with XML reporters, the EPA will provide the XML schema for

the inputs to equations data entered into IVT and example XML files to use for testing the XML 

upload approach. The EPA agrees that changes to the XML schema need to be thoroughly tested, 

and the EPA plans to do so prior to releasing the XML schema for e-GGRT and IVT.

The EPA disagrees with the comments that the pilot verification tool provided at proposal 

for the mass balance methodology in subpart X was of limited value for assessing the burden of 

use for other methodologies and subparts required to use IVT. As discussed in detail above, the 

overall design of the IVT is the same irrespective of the differences in methodologies and 

subparts. Accordingly, the subpart X prototype allowed reporters to review the overall design, 

structure, and functionality of IVT for all subparts that are to use the tool. Based on their 

experience with the subpart X prototype, reporters may assess the burden associated with other 

subparts by comparing the number and complexity of equations in other subparts to the equations 

in subpart X. Further, in the proposed Impacts Analysis, “Assessment of Cost Impacts of 2015 

Inputs Proposal – Revisions to Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Verification Requirements Under 

the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program,” August 2013 (available in the EPA’s Docket ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2010-0929), the EPA stated that the burden for entering inputs to equations into 

IVT is no different than it would be to enter them into e-GGRT for reporting to the EPA. The 

EPA did not receive comments on the proposed Impacts analysis. For the reasons stated above, 

we do not believe that it is necessary to re-propose the tool with all subparts to provide an 

opportunity to comment on the burden of using the tool for all subparts, as suggested by several 

commenters. Refer to the next comment and response for additional detail on the specific 
Page 38 of 186

comments provided to the EPA on IVT design and functionality and how the EPA is addressing 

those comments.

Regarding the comment that rigorous testing of each affected subpart is critical to 

ensuring that data are adequately protected, refer to comments and responses later in this section 

on how the EPA is ensuring that inputs entered into IVT are not retained by the EPA. 

Comment: Many commenters provided useful suggestions for improvements to IVT. For 

example, some commenters recommended IVT include functions that allow reporters to 

automatically populate web form fields in situations where the data are reported on a recurring 

basis (e.g., weekly, monthly, etc.) and are likely to remain constant over time. Other commenters 

recommended IVT allow data to be copied from external spreadsheets or other data files instead 

of being entered individually into IVT. These commenters noted that this approach would save 

time and avoid unnecessary transcription errors. Three commenters recommended that IVT flag 

any data entry errors related to the data being outside an acceptable range directly following data 

entry, rather than on a separate screen. One of these commenters requested that IVT should 

provide more information regarding the error triggered (e.g., whether the entered data are above 

or below the expected range). These commenters stressed that alerting reporters to errors at the 

moment of data entry would help reporters identify errors more quickly. Three commenters 

recommended an additional comment field be added to IVT that allows reporters to respond to 

IVT error messages. They maintained that this approach would streamline the verification 

process and save time for both the EPA and reporters by potentially avoiding follow-up after the 

report has been submitted to the EPA. 

Response: The EPA has reviewed the commenters’ suggested improvements to IVT and, 

with the exception of one suggestion described below, has incorporated these improvements in 
Page 39 of 186

IVT. The EPA agrees with the suggestion that reporters should have the ability to automatically 

populate web form fields in situations where the data required to be entered were collected on a 

recurring basis (e.g., weekly, monthly, etc.). For example, in subpart X, for the gas stream entry 

fields, reporters will be able to automatically populate the monthly carbon content and molecular 

weight of the feedstock with the first month’s values since those values may remain constant in 

many cases. The EPA anticipates that this change in IVT will improve the efficiency of the data 

entry process and reduce chances for errors associated with manual entry. Regarding the 

recommendation to allow data to be copied from external spreadsheets or other data files instead 

of being entered individually into IVT, the EPA agrees with commenters that this capability 

would reduce burden and errors associated with manual data entry. For each data element for 

which the reporter is required to enter values collected at a frequency greater than monthly, the 

EPA is providing an off-line tool to convert spreadsheets to the XML input format, for use with 

IVT.

The EPA has evaluated commenters’ concerns regarding the flagging of data errors when 

they are entered into IVT. As discussed in the proposed rule, IVT provides “real-time” checks as 

data are entered into IVT, similar to checks in e-GGRT. The results of these checks, called 

validation messages in IVT, will be easily accessible within e-GGRT at the time of entry. 

Although such warnings will be on a separate screen, there are direct links to such screens to 

ensure that it is easy to navigate to IVT to revise data as needed. This is the same for all 

validation checks that are currently conducted and displayed within e-GGRT for all reporters.

Although we recognize the potential usefulness of this suggestion, this type of design change 

would require a significant amount of resources, and cannot be done prior to the reporting period 

for reporting year 2014. The EPA is always open to making changes to e-GGRT and IVT over 
Page 40 of 186

time, and may consider whether it is feasible to show validation messages on the same screen on 

which the data are being entered and, if so, whether to make such adjustment in IVT.

The EPA agrees with commenters that IVT should provide more information regarding 

the error triggered (e.g., whether entered data are above or below the expected range). 

Accordingly, in response to these comments, IVT will include an “out of range” message in the 

verification summary that indicates the range being used for each data element entered as well as 

whether the value entered was above or below the range. We anticipate that this additional 

information will make the verification process more efficient by reducing the amount of followup required for verification.

Finally, the EPA has considered commenter recommendations for addition of a comment 

field allowing reporters to respond to IVT error messages, explaining why a potential error may 

not be an error, such as when an entered equation input is found to be out of range or has 

otherwise triggered a message on the verification summary. The EPA recognizes that, in some 

cases, reporters may have inputs to emission equations that are legitimately outside of identified

ranges due to unique circumstances. In cases such as these, we agree with commenters that this 

option will reduce the amount of follow-up required of the EPA and reporters. As such, we have 

implemented this change in IVT. 

Comment: Eight commenters raised security concerns regarding data entered into IVT. 

These commenters wanted additional information on how IVT would protect sensitive data and 

assurances that the data would not be inadvertently disclosed. One commenter stated that the 

security of IVT was particularly important to facilities that are required to comply with certain 

U.S. export control requirements. Four commenters were concerned about security during the 

period of transient storage while the user is logged into IVT of data. Some commenters asked for 
Page 41 of 186

clarification on where the data will reside during this period, while other commenters wanted the 

EPA to demonstrate that data would only be stored temporarily and that no data would be 

retained during a system crash. Some commenters wanted additional information about who 

would have access to the data during this transient storage of the data. One commenter wanted 

the EPA to confirm that data with disclosure concerns entered into IVT would not be accessible 

to EPA personnel. Two commenters were concerned that outside vendors would have access to 

data in the transient storage area. Three commenters were concerned about the security of data 

transmitted over the internet. Two commenters were concerned that data could be intercepted 

during transmission by proxy servers and that data may still be stored in these proxy servers after 

the session ends. One commenter expressed concern that use of XML files to input data into IVT

raises security concerns because the format is easily readable, containing the definitions needed 

to decipher the data values. This commenter was also concerned that malicious or inadvertent 

HTML codes can be inserted into XML files thereby causing other security vulnerabilities. Other 

commenters wanted the EPA to confirm that IVT will not submit confidential information over 

the Internet. 

Response: IVT is designed to operate securely within e-GGRT, as a transient process, 

such that data entered into IVT would be temporarily housed in the IVT system while the 

reporter is actively using IVT. The IVT system is designed so that entered inputs data are placed 

only in session (server memory). The entered inputs will not be saved to the underlying EPA 

database, nor will they be saved to the server’s file system. The EPA has taken the following 

steps to ensure that inputs data are not mistakenly appended to data that are saved (e.g., when 

saving validation and verification summary records to the database) and to ensure that 

information saved to the server logs does not contain user-entered inputs data. IVT has not been 
Page 42 of 186

configured to use the server’s file system to temporarily save files. Instead, IVT is configured 

only to use memory for transient housing of inputs data while the reporter is actively using IVT. 

This configuration applies to inputs data entered into IVT webforms or data uploaded from a 

local ‘inputs’ file through the IVT webforms, as well as inputs data uploaded through the XML 

upload process. As with data entered through the webform, IVT will not save uploaded XML 

files to the underlying EPA database or to the server’s file system, but will only retain the data in 

server memory for the duration of the session. Uploaded XML files will be validated against a 

published schema definition (i.e., published document prescribing the required format of the 

file), so in many cases XML files containing “malicious or inadvertent HTML codes” would be 

rejected by the system as not being well-formed. If “malicious or inadvertent HTML codes” 

were inserted into an XML in a manner that did not render it invalid, the file would be rejected 

by a process that inspects uploaded files for script tags. Therefore, the system is not vulnerable to 

any potential HTML code appended to these files. The entered inputs to emission equations are 

then erased when the user’s session with e-GGRT ends.

Regarding the comments that unauthorized persons may be able to access data that are

temporarily in session while the reporter is actively using IVT and the concerns with 

transmission of data over the Internet and potential data interception, the EPA complies with the 

strict security procedures and guidance governing access to federal data servers established by 

the National Institutes of Standards and Technology (NIST) and in accordance with the Federal 

Information Security Management Act of 2002 (FISMA). All EPA information systems must 

meet the security requirements defined in the NIST Special Publication 800-53.

13 Adherence to 

the NIST Federal Information Systems requirements are intended to protect EPA information 

 

13 http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/PubsSPs.html.
Page 43 of 186

systems, including e-GGRT, from a diverse set of threats including hostile cyber-attacks, natural 

disasters, structural failures, and human errors. As such, the program keeps a security plan up to 

date and conducts annual reviews of the security controls. Furthermore, in order to address the 

security concerns noted by the commenter regarding unauthorized access to data while it is in 

session on the server, the EPA has identified an additional security layer beyond the NIST 

requirements to encrypt the transient session data used by the server while the reporter is actively 

using IVT. The session data will be encrypted with a key unique to that user’s session. As a 

result, the EPA has concluded that this suite of protections is sufficient to address concerns 

raised regarding the possibility of unauthorized persons accessing data in the transient housing 

area while the reporter is actively using IVT. 

Regarding the comments expressing concern over transmission of data over the Internet 

and potential data interception, the inputs data entered by a reporter in the web form are 

encrypted via Transport Layer Security (TLS) security protocol. TLS is a standard security 

protocol providing an encrypted link between the client (the user’s browser) and the EPA’s 

servers. TLS encryption ensures that entered data are secure from the browser to the EPA server. 

Normal Internet HTTP communication sends data between the client and the server in plain text. 

Application of the TLS protocol to HTTP communication (HTTPS) will ensure that the inputs 

data are encrypted rather than in plain text while in transit. TLS encryption ensures that data are 

completely secure from the user’s browser to the e-GGRT servers. Although data are transferred 

over the Internet through proxy servers, due to TLS encryption, the inputs data would never be in 

plain text and could not be deciphered by intermediate or proxy servers. TLS is the standard 

security protocol used to protect the transfer of many types of sensitive data, including credit 

card numbers, banking data, and similar information requiring maximum protection. The EPA 
Page 44 of 186

does not use proxy servers for its e-GGRT database, but relies completely on dedicated server 

space at the National Computer Center. Therefore, TLS termination takes place only on secured 

e-GGRT servers. The EPA will always use these secure servers (identified with the “https” 

prefix), which identify that the TLS security protocol is applied, and IVT will not incorporate 

inputs to emission equations data into URLs. This also applies to data transferred through XML 

upload. XML data uploaded by a user will also be encrypted via TLS security protocol and will 

not be in plain text while in transit. If intercepted while in transit, the XML data would be 

encrypted and therefore indecipherable. These encrytion procedures will protect data as they are

transferred between the client’s browser and the EPA’s servers. 

IVT is also designed to protect data in the instance of a system malfunction. In the event 

of a system crash, all session data are lost, including the session key that would be capable of 

decrypting that data. There are no processes in place to save any information during a system 

crash. Therefore, if a reporter enters data into IVT and the IVT system malfunctions, the 

reporter’s data are not stored in any way and cannot be recovered.

Regarding an earlier comment that IVT is an unproven system, the EPA disagrees with 

this comment. The EPA designed a prototype to demonstrate the functionality of the tool. As 

stated earlier in this preamble, this prototype allowed reporters to review the overall design, 

structure, and functionality of IVT, which applies to all subparts required to use the tool. For 

additional information on this topic, please see the discussion earlier in this preamble on the 

prototype and “sandbox” testing.

In summary, the EPA has taken several steps to add safeguards and to build multiple

security “layers” into the system to prevent release of the data as they are transmitted to the 

EPA’s servers and temporarily housed while the user is actively using IVT, but are not retained 
Page 45 of 186

in the server memory after the user’s e-GGRT session ends. The EPA is confident that the 

described security procedures will adequately protect the data entered into IVT.

Comment: Six commenters stated that they consider equation input data required to be 

entered into IVT to be CBI and expressed concern that the EPA has not gone far enough to 

legally protect these data from public disclosure. Four commenters described how these data

meet the five-part criteria specified in 40 CFR 2.208 for confidential treatment. The 

commenters asserted that the EPA recognized in its proposed rule that these data are entitled 

to protection from public disclosure. The commenters questioned why, given this 

recognition, the EPA has not afforded these data CBI protection under the CAA. Two 

commenters questioned why the EPA was silent in its proposal as to whether these data are 

to be afforded CBI protection, instead focusing on revising reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements for these data.

Five of the commenters referred to a continued risk associated with the proposed 

verification approach that equation inputs entered into IVT will be available to the public or 

subject to disclosure under the CAA. Four commenters noted that section 114(c) requires that the 

EPA must provide “emission data” to the public, if requested. One of these commenters 

described the continued risk as related to the EPA’s inspection of facility records, indicating that 

the EPA did not include provisions in the proposal explaining whether or how records of 

equation input data entered into IVT are to be afforded CBI protection or otherwise protected 

from public disclosure as a result of Agency review of records. The commenter further stated 

that the proposed rule does not set forth a requirement that the EPA can access these data only 

through an official enforcement-related action that might afford the information privileged status 

and provide some security from public release, nor, according to the commenter, are there 
Page 46 of 186

provisions to ensure that non-enforcement staff or EPA contractors cannot access the data and 

inadvertently release these data or otherwise render the information unprotected.

Three commenters further expressed concern that by retaining any residual risk of 

disclosure of equation input data entered into IVT, 40 CFR Part 98 could potentially subject 

reporters to antitrust liability. The commenters explained that equation input data required to be 

entered into IVT include cost- and output-related information that is a significant determinant of 

prices, including information regarding fuel production and distribution, which provides details 

about plant operations and inputs, nature, and location of sources. 

The six commenters contended that the EPA must take further steps to address the 

remaining “residual risk” of disclosure under the CAA of equation input data required to be 

entered into IVT. Five of the commenters urged the EPA to provide CBI protection to equation 

inputs entered into IVT. Four of the commenters urged the EPA to address their concerns 

about disclosure by explicitly stating in the final rule that data entered into IVT qualify for 

confidential treatment under the EPA’s regulations and should not be deemed “emission data.”

One commenter requested that the EPA address their concerns about disclosure by including

in the final rule language expressly recognizing the CBI status of these data. One commenter 

urged the EPA to further address concerns about the residual risk of disclosure by clarifying,

in the preamble to the final rule, that equation input data entered into IVT remain at all times 

in the possession of the company entering the data and thus are not subject to disclosure 

under any other Federal law as a result of entry into IVT.

Response: As explained below, the EPA has not determined either in this rulemaking or 

any other final action that the equation input data entered into IVT are entitled to CBI protection.

The EPA previously amended Part 98 to defer the reporting of inputs to emission equations data 
Page 47 of 186

elements to allow the Agency time to evaluate concerns raised by some reporters regarding 

potential public disclosure of some of these data elements and to take appropriate action (76 FR 

53057, August 25, 2011). The four-step evaluation, which was designed to inform the Agency 

whether and what further action may be appropriate, includes discussions of potential disclosure 

scenarios as well as consideration of alternative emission calculation and verification methods.14

The evaluation does not include establishing confidentiality status for any data that the EPA 

assigns to the inputs to emission equations category. Any such determination must be made in 

accordance with the CAA and the EPA’s implementing regulations under 40 CFR part 2, subpart 

B. Based on the evaluation,15 we had proposed, and are now taking final action, to replace the 

requirement to report certain inputs to emission equations by 2015 with a requirement to enter 

these data into IVT. Although the final rule addresses potential disclosure concerns with respect 

to certain inputs by providing an alternative verification tool (i.e., IVT) instead of requiring 

reporting of these inputs, it does not include final confidentiality determinations for any equation 

input data required to be entered into IVT, nor has the EPA stated anywhere in the rulemaking 

record that such data are entitled to CBI protection. The EPA therefore has not concluded that 

any such data (inputs to emission equations) are entitled to CBI protection.

Regarding the comments that expressed concern about the EPA’s ability to protect 

equation input data entered into IVT, the concern may have stemmed from a mistaken belief that 

the EPA will have possession of such data. That is not the case as explained in detail here, as 

 

14 For a description of the evaluation process, please see the memorandum titled “Process for Evaluating and Potentially 

Amending Part 98 Inputs to Emission Equations” (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0929).

15 The results of the evaluation were documented in the four following memoranda available in the EPA’s Docket ID No. EPA–

HQ–OAR–2010-0929: “Evaluation of Public Availability of Inputs to Emission Equations for which Reporting was Deferred to 

March 31, 2015,” August 2013; “Evaluation of Competitive Harm from Disclosure of ’Inputs to Equations’ Data Elements 

Deferred to March 31, 2015,” August 2013; “Evaluation of Alternative Calculation Methods,” August 2013; “Evaluation of 

Alternative Verification Approaches For Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule Subparts for which Reporting of Inputs to Emission 

Equations was Deferred to March 31, 2015,” August 2013.
Page 48 of 186

well as in the response to comment immediately above, Section II.A of the preamble to the 

proposed rule (78 FR 55994, September 11, 2013), and the memorandum “Technical Approach 

and Design for Inputs Verification Tool,” August 2013 (refer to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR2010-0929). During the time period that a reporter is entering data (i.e., inputs to emissions 

equations) into IVT, the EPA will have no access to the data being entered. Further, when a 

reporter logs out of IVT, none of the data entered into IVT are retained in the EPA’s electronic 

systems. To address concerns about potential release of these data via the Internet, the EPA

provides further clarifications regarding the security of IVT elsewhere in this section of the 

preamble. Given that the EPA will have no access to, nor possession of, data entered into IVT, 

such data will not be considered to be agency records as defined by the Freedom of Information 

Act or the Federal Records Act, and the EPA cannot conceive, and the commenters did not 

explain, which federal law would require the EPA to release information that it does not have.

For the same reason, the EPA also rejects any suggestion that the Agency is legally required to 

protect or make confidentiality determinations for equation input data entered into IVT. The 

commenters have not identified any law or regulation that requires the EPA to protect data not in 

the EPA’s possession, nor do we believe that any such duty exists. For the reasons stated above, 

we disagree with the comments that the EPA must provide CBI protection to equation input data 

entered into IVT. 

With respect to the commenter’s inquiry on how records of equation input data entered 

into IVT, which are required to be kept on-site, are protected from public disclosure as a result of 

Agency review of records, we describe below the verification process, including follow-up onsite visits. As described below, we do not envision that an onsite review of records for purposes 

of verifying emissions reported using inputs that are entered into IVT would necessitate or
Page 49 of 186

typically involve collection of those records. Rather, visual inspections would likely suffice to 

determine whether or not a facility is in compliance. 

As described below, the EPA has developed a robust electronic verification and 

communication system in order to ensure high quality data are reported under the GHGRP, and 

the verification summaries from IVT will be integrated into that process. This electronic 

verification approach helps to minimize the need for on-site review which helps to reduce the 

burden and costs to the EPA and reporters. Likely scenarios under which a GHGRP inspection 

could occur due to information received from the IVT verification summaries are described 

below. As described below, none of these activities typically involve the EPA’s collection of the 

inputs entered into the IVT.

As explained in the proposed rule, the first step of the verification process will include 

review of the verification summary generated by the IVT in conjunction with the results of the 

verification checks that are currently used on the annual report data. In the event that the EPA’s 

review results in remaining questions regarding data quality, the EPA plans to follow-up with the 

facility initially via email or phone to determine whether a reporting error has occurred. For 

example, if the EPA learns from the facility that the facility’s production doubled in a given year 

due to unusually high demand, the EPA may then understand the increase in emissions, certain 

out of range warnings, and determine that there is not a data quality issue. If the EPA is unable to 

resolve the issue via phone and email, an on-site visit may be needed. The EPA anticipates that 

these visits would likely include a review of the records required to be kept which, as mentioned 

above, include the record of the inputs to emission equations that were entered into IVT as well 

as an examination of the monitoring equipment. Depending on the results of the verification 

summary for a particular facility, the EPA envisions two general scenarios for these on-site 
Page 50 of 186

visits. One scenario would be that the verification summary produced by IVT for a particular 

facility indicates that the reported emissions values matched the values calculated by IVT but 

other verification checks show that certain inputs are outside the EPA’s expected range(s). In

that scenario, the EPA anticipates that if a site visit is needed, the site visit would focus on the 

accuracy of the inputs entered into IVT. To verify the accuracy of the inputs entered into IVT, 

the EPA would likely check whether data entered into IVT are consistent with other records 

required to be kept by the facility. For example, if an input to an equation is a monthly average 

of a value that is measured daily by a particular on-site monitor and the daily measured values 

are also required records, the EPA may confirm that the input entered into IVT is in fact the 

average of the daily values. In addition, the EPA may confirm that the on-site monitor meets the 

specifications prescribed in Part 98, such as calibration and accuracy specifications. If calibration 

and accuracy specifications do not comply with Part 98 requirements, then a substantive error16

would likely be identified, and the facility would need to resubmit their report. If the inputs at 

issue comport with the on-site records, then there would be no further action necessary by either 

the EPA or the reporter. As described above, because we envision that verification would be 

completed while on-site, we do not expect that there would be a need to collect inputs records.

In the second scenario, an on-site visit that is conducted in a situation when the 

verification summary produced by IVT indicates a discrepancy between the reported emissions 

and the emission equation results calculated by IVT, the EPA anticipates that the visit would 

focus on determining the root cause of the discrepancy. The EPA would ask the facility to 

 

16 40 CFR 98.3(h)(3) defines substantive error as an error that impacts the quantity of GHG emissions reported or otherwise 

prevents the reported data from being validated or verified. 40 CFR 98.3(h) states that once a substantive error is identified, an 

owner or operator shall, within 45 days of receipt of the notification, either resubmit the report that, for each identified 

substantive error, corrects the identified substantive error (in accordance with the applicable requirements of this part) or provide 

information demonstrating that the previously submitted report does not contain the identified substantive error or that the 

identified error is not a substantive error.
Page 51 of 186

demonstrate how their emissions calculations yielded a result different from the one calculated 

through the use of IVT. The EPA expects that such discrepancy is likely a result of mathematical 

error(s), which would likely constitute a substantive error, and the facility would need to 

resubmit their report.

In both of these scenarios, the EPA envisions that the discrepancies would be resolved 

on-site and that collecting the on-site records of inputs would not be necessary. Despite the 

above, we do not rule out the possibility that collection of certain records could be necessary 

under unique circumstances not contemplated above. However, the EPA does not know at this 

point what records would be removed, the specific circumstances under which they would be 

collected and the reasons for such collection, and therefore we cannot address at this time how 

such records would be treated. Should that occur, the EPA will treat the collected information 

according to applicable laws and regulations.

Regarding the comments asserting that 40 CFR Part 98 could potentially subject reporters 

to antitrust liability, the EPA reiterates that information entered into IVT is not reported to or 

collected by the EPA. As a result, it does not become an agency record and, therefore,it is not 

subject to Freedom of Information Act or other required disclosures related to agency records. 

B. Removal of the Requirement to Report Certain Data Elements

1. Summary of Final Amendments to Part 98

The EPA is removing the requirement to report 396 data elements in the 23 subparts 

listed in Table 2 of this preamble. Of these 396 data elements removed from reporting, 378 data 

elements are removed due to disclosure concerns and 18 data elements are removed because 

these data elements are redundant to other inputs being reported or are no longer useful to be 

reported to the EPA in the absence of other inputs to emission equations that will no longer be 
Page 52 of 186

reported (refer to the discussion below for further explanation). Of the 378 data elements

removed from reporting due to disclosure concerns, 324 data elements will be entered into IVT.

17

We are finalizing the proposed amendments to remove reporting requirements and require entry 

of these data elements into IVT, with changes specified in Section II.B.2 of this preamble.

Table 3 of this preamble provides a summary of the number of data elements removed 

from reporting for each subpart. Refer to Table 1 in the memorandum “Data Elements Deferred 

to March 31, 2015: Final List of ‘Inputs to Equations’ Data Elements Not To Be Reported,”

September 2014, (refer to Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010-0929) for a list of these 396 data 

elements removed from reporting. 

Table 3. Subparts for Which Reporting Requirements are Removed

Subpart

Number of Inputs to 

Emission Equations for 

which reporting was deferred 

to 2015 (“Deferred Inputs”)

Number of Deferred 

Inputs for which 

reporting is removed

C—General Stationary Fuel Combustion—

Stationary fuel combustion sources 

excluding sources that contain at least one 

combustion unit connected to a fuel-fired 

electric generator owned or operated by an 

entity that is subject to regulation of 

customer billing rates by the public utility 

commission (excluding generators 

connected to combustion units subject to 40 

CFR part 98, subpart D) and that are 

located at a facility for which the sum of

the nameplate capacities for all such 

electric generators is greater than or 

equal to 1 megawatt electric output a

26b26b

E—Adipic Acid Production 21 11

F—Aluminum Production 29 29

G—Ammonia Manufacturing 8 8

H—Cement Production 16 14

K—Ferroalloy Production 13 13

 

17As mentioned above, there are 378 equation inputs for which reporting was deferred to 2015 and for which the EPA determined 

there are disclosure concerns, and 324 of these equation inputs must be entered into IVT. Fifty-four of the 378 equation inputs do 

not need to be entered into IVT because these equation inputs are redundant to other equations inputs being entered into IVT or 

are otherwise not needed for verification.
Page 53 of 186

Subpart

Number of Inputs to 

Emission Equations for 

which reporting was deferred 

to 2015 (“Deferred Inputs”)

Number of Deferred 

Inputs for which 

reporting is removed

N—Glass Production 3 3

O—HCFC-22 Production and HFC-23 

Destruction

15 12

P—Hydrogen Production 7 7

Q—Iron and Steel Production 86 85

R—Lead Production 10 10

S—Lime Manufacturing 9 9

U—Miscellaneous Uses of Carbonate 6 6

V—Nitric Acid Production 21 21

X—Petrochemical Production 19c19c

Y—Petroleum Refineries 75 70

Z—Phosphoric Acid Production 4 4

AA—Pulp and Paper Manufacturing 31 28

BB—Silicon Carbide Production 3 3

CC—Soda Ash Manufacturing 10 4

EE—Titanium Dioxide Production 2 2

GG—Zinc Production 8 8

TT—Industrial Waste Landfills 4 4

a These subpart C sources may elect to report inputs to emission equations rather than use IVT.

Additionally, the reporting requirements are not amended for stationary fuel combustion sources that 

contain at least one combustion unit connected to a fuel-fired electric generator owned or operated by 

an entity that is subject to regulation of customer billing rates by the PUC (excluding generators 

connected to combustion units subject to 40 CFR part 98, subpart D) and that are located at a facility 

for which the sum of the nameplate capacities for all such electric generators is greater than or equal 

to 1 megawatt electric output. 

b

Includes one deferred input to an emission equations, 40 CFR 98.3(d)(3)(v), which is specified in 

subpart A of part 98 and applies to only certain reporters under 40 CFR part 98, subpart C.

c There were 2 additional inputs to emission equations for which reporting was deferred to 2015; 

however, these two inputs are not reflected in this table because the inputs were removed from Part 

98 by a previous rulemaking (78 FR 71904, November 29, 2013).

The EPA is finalizing the proposed amendments to exclude from reporting 18 deferred 

inputs to emission equations for which no disclosure concerns have been identified. As explained 

in the preamble to the proposed rule (78 FR 56005, September 11, 2013), while posing no 

disclosure concerns, these data elements are redundant to other inputs being reported or are no 

longer useful to be reported in the absence of other inputs to emission equations that will no 

longer be reported; they are not needed to be reported to the EPA for data verification and they 

are also not helpful in informing future GHG policy development. For further information on 
Page 54 of 186

these 18 data elements, please see the memorandum “Data Elements Deferred to March 31, 

2015: Final List of Data Elements Not To Be Reported,” September 2014 (refer to Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010-0929).

For the remaining inputs to emission equations for which reporting was deferred to 2015

for the 23 subparts listed in Table 2 of this preamble, the EPA is not amending the reporting 

requirements because the EPA has not identified disclosure concerns associated with their public 

release, and reporting of these data elements remains useful to the EPA for data verification as 

well as for informing future GHG policy development. Deferral of reporting of these inputs to 

emission equations expires on March 31, 2015. As a result, by March 31, 2015, 151 inputs to 

emission equations must be reported for reporting year 2014 and all prior reporting years, except 

as described below for six inputs to emission equations in subpart W of part 98. These 151 data

inputs must also be reported in the annual report for all future reporting years, except as specified 

below for the six inputs to emission equations in subpart W. Refer to Section III.A.3 of the 

preamble to the proposed rule (78 FR 56005, September 11, 2013) for further discussion about 

how 2010 through 2014 data will be included in the 2014 annual report. For a list of these 151

deferred inputs to emission equations that will be reported, refer to Table 2 of the memorandum 

cited above. Additionally, to clarify which data elements must be reported for previous reporting 

years 2010 through 2013, the EPA is finalizing its proposed revision of Table A-7 of Part 98,

“Data Elements That Are Inputs To Emission Equations And For Which The Reporting Deadline 

Is March 31, 2015”, which includes these 151 inputs to emission equations that must be reported.

For the purposes of reporting the subpart W inputs for reporting years 2011 through

2014, the EPA plans to use a spreadsheet format that will be uploaded to e-GGRT. Recognizing 

the substantial amount of information that facilities will be entering into the spreadsheet, the 
Page 55 of 186

EPA anticipates publishing the spreadsheet in October 2014. This will allow facilities to begin 

data entry into the spreadsheet prior to the open reporting period. The spreadsheet can then be 

uploaded to e-GGRT during the open reporting season.

For subpart W, the EPA is finalizing the proposed decision to require subpart W facilities 

to report all inputs to emission equations for which reporting was deferred to 2015; however, in 

the final rule, in response to comment, the EPA is providing an option for reporters to delay 

reporting of six of these inputs to emission equations for two reporting years for specific 

situations related to two types of exploratory wells, delineation and wildcat wells (as defined in 

this final rule in 40 CFR 98.238), starting with reporting year 2013.

2. Summary of Changes Since Proposal

This section provides a brief summary of changes since proposal to the proposed

requirement to use IVT. The EPA’s rationale for these changes is provided in Section II.A.3 as 

part of the EPA’s response to the related comment(s). 

The changes to the list of data elements removed from reporting and required to be 

entered into IVT are as follows:

 The proposed amendments, specifically at 40 CFR 98.5(b), required that the inputs to 

emission equations for the calculation methods listed in the proposed Table A-8,

“Calculation Methods For Which Inputs To the Calculation Methods Must be Entered 

Into Verification Software Specified By the Administrator,” be entered into IVT. In the 

final rule, the EPA removed the proposed Table A-8 of part 98, replacing it with a new 

“verification software records” provision in the recordkeeping section of each affected 

subpart, which lists for each subpart each equation input that must be entered into IVT.

 The proposed amendments required that the data element in 40 CFR 98.196(b)(8) be 

entered into IVT. After proposal, we discovered that this data element is not an input to 

an emission equation. Further, it is no longer needed for verification because the 

proposed new data element (40 CFR 98.196(b)(18)), which is being finalized in today’s 

action, will be sufficient for verification purposes. Therefore, in the final rule, we are 

removing the reporting requirement for this data element.

 The proposed amendments did not require that the input to Equation F-4 be entered into 

IVT, because this input is not required to be reported under Part 98. Based on a 
Page 56 of 186

suggestion from a commenter, in the final rule we are requiring that the input to Equation 

F-4 be entered into IVT. Although part 98 does not require reporting of this input, the 

commenter stated that this input should be entered into IVT, and we agree that it is 

needed for calculating and verifying emissions in subpart F. 

 The EPA is replacing eight reporting elements, which were incorrectly identified in the 

final deferral rulemaking (76 FR 53057, August 25, 2011) as inputs to Equations F-2 and 

F-3 and were, therefore, incorrectly proposed (78 FR 55994, September 11, 2013) to be 

entered into IVT (instead of the correct inputs to Equations F-2 and F-3). As a result of a 

comment received, the EPA discovered that it had previously misidentified eight data 

elements as inputs to Equations F-2 and F-3, mistakenly required and then deferred their 

reporting under part 98, and recently mistakenly proposed their entry into IVT. These 

misidentified data elements are annual values; whereas the inputs to these two equations 

are monthly values, which are not required to be reported under Part 98. In light of the 

error, the EPA is requiring in this final rule that the correct inputs (monthly values) for 

Equations F-2 and F-3 be entered into IVT. Further, given that the EPA had previously 

incorrectly required the reporting of these eight annual values as inputs to Equations F-2 

and F-3, and given that the actual inputs (i.e., the monthly values) for Equations F-2 and

F-3 will be entered into IVT, the EPA does not need these eight annual values for 

verification. The EPA is therefore finalizing the removal of reporting of these eight

annual values for Equations F-2 and F-3. Refer to the EPA’s comment response 

document in Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0929 for further discussion of this 

comment supporting entry into IVT of monthly input data for Equations F-2 through F-4 

and the EPA’s response.

 For a given sub-basin, in the following situations, the EPA is providing the option to 

delay for two reporting years the reporting of six data elements associated with 

delineation or wildcat wells starting in reporting year 2013: 

– for gas well completions or workovers with hydraulic fracturing, where wildcat wells 

and/or delineation wells are the only wells in a sub-basin that can be used for the 

measurement; and

– for onshore production storage tanks, where wildcat wells and/or delineation wells are 

the only wells in a sub-basin.

These six data elements are: (1) measured flow rate of backflow during well completion 

(40 CFR 98.236(c)(6)(i)(B)); (2) measured flow rate of backflow during well workover 

(40 CFR 98.236 (c)(6)(i)(D)); (3) total number of days of backflow from all wells during 

completions (40 CFR 98.236 (c)(6)(i)(E)); (4) total number of days of backflow from all 

wells during workovers (40 CFR 98.236 (c)(6)(i)(F)); (5) total volume of oil from all 

wellhead separators sent to tank(s) in barrels per year (40 CFR 98.236(c)(8)(i)(F)); and 

(6) total volume of sales oil from all wells in barrels per year (40 CFR 

98.236(c)(8)(ii)(A)). For reporting years 2011 and 2012, the two year delay would still 

require reporting by March 31, 2015. As a result, there is no need to delay reporting for 

these two reporting years. Refer to Section II.B.3 of this preamble for the EPA’s rationale 

for this decision. If the 2-year delay in reporting is used, the reporter must report the 

following information in the current reporting year: indicate for each delayed reporting 

element that one of the two situations listed above is true (e.g., for gas well completions 

or workovers with hydraulic fracturing, wildcat wells and/or delineation wells are the 
Page 57 of 186

only wells in a sub-basin that can be used for the measurement). In addition, when 

reporters report the delayed inputs to emission equations after the 2 year delay, they must 

also report the API well ID numbers for the applicable wildcat and/or delineation wells in 

the sub-basin for which the reporting element was delayed.

 For purposes of part 98, the EPA has added to 40 CFR 90.238 definitions of “delineation 

well” and “wildcat well.” “Delineation well” is defined as “a well drilled in order to 

determine the boundary of a field or producing reservoir.” “Wildcat well” is defined as “a 

well outside known fields or the first well drilled in an oil or gas field where no other oil 

and gas production exists.” These definitions are consistent with the definitions of 

“delineation well” and “wildcat well” in 40 CFR part 60, subpart OOOO. Refer to 

Section II.B.2 of this preamble for the EPA’s rationale for this decision.

 The EPA has removed from reporting the inputs to emission equations in 40 CFR 

98.226(i), (j), (m)(4), (m)(5), and (p). These data must be entered into IVT, except for 40 

CFR 98.226(j). Refer to Section II.B.3 of this preamble for the EPA’s rationale for this 

decision.

3. Summary of Comments and Responses

This section summarizes the significant comments and responses related to the proposed 

amendments to remove reporting requirements and require entry of data into IVT. The EPA’s 

comment response document in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0929 provides a complete 

listing of all comments related to this topic and the EPA’s responses.

Comment: One commenter asserted that all 9 inputs to emission equations reported under 

40 CFR 98.226(i), (j), (m)(4) and (5), and (p) would reveal process design, process performance, 

and operational efficiencies data regarding a nitric acid train. The commenter further noted that

the EPA indicated in section 2.2 of its memorandum, “Evaluation of Competitive Harm from 

Disclosure of ‘Inputs to Equations’ Data Elements Deferred to March 31, 2015,” August 2013 

(refer to Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010-0929), that these types of data could be used to 

determine facility operational conditions and would, therefore, have disclosure concerns.

Response: In the EPA’s proposed harm analysis cited above in the comment summary, 

the EPA stated that the 9 inputs to emission equations reported under 40 CFR 98.226(i), (j), 

(m)(4) and (5), and (p) would not reveal any proprietary information about cost to do business, 
Page 58 of 186

raw material usage, production, or facility or process performance, design, and operation, as 

long as the emission factors required to be reported in 40 CFR 98.226(m)(1) are not reported. As 

a result of this comment, the EPA further investigated the operational conditions at current nitric 

acid facilities, and considered the specific case when there are nitric acid facilities that have nonoperational nitric acid trains and others that are in the process of installing or upgrading NOX 

control devices, some of which can also serve as N2O abatement (i.e., non-selective catalytic 

reduction). In light of this, the data reported under 40 CFR 98.226(i), (j), (m)(4), (m)(5), and (p), 

if reported over a multiple-year period where facilities are making changes to the operational 

status of their trains and/or abatement systems, could be used to determine train-specific 

conditions at the facility, such as efficiency losses, equipment degradation, changes in nitric acid 

demand, and/or the installation of N2O abatement technology. As a result, the EPA agrees with 

the commenter that the deferred inputs to emission equations reported under 40 CFR 98.226(i), 

(j), (m)(4), (m)(5), and (p) (destruction efficiency and fraction control factor of the abatement 

technology, abatement utilization factor, and nitrous oxide (N2O) concentration and volumetric 

flow rate per test run during performance test of each train) would reveal information about 

process design, process performance, and operational efficiencies of a nitric acid train, regardless 

of whether the emission factors required to be reported in 40 CFR 98.226(m)(1) are not reported.

Therefore, the EPA has concluded that these data have disclosure concerns, and the EPA is 

removing these data from the reporting requirements in the final rule. Reporters will be required 

to enter these data into IVT, except 40 CFR 98.226(j), which is not needed to be entered into 

IVT for verification purposes because IVT generates this value using the inputs entered into 

Equation V-2 and Equation V-2. 
Page 59 of 186

Comment: One commenter expressed concern about reporting information on exploratory 

wells in Subpart W, especially when the wells are located in step-out areas where no prior 

reporting exists for a given sub-basin (including vertical or horizontal wells). The commenter 

explained that the problem occurs when an exploratory well is the sole well in a sub-basin 

(including vertical or horizontal wells) and is not reported in combination with other wells, 

thereby shielding any individual well’s contribution. The commenter noted that its concerns are 

related to the timing of releasing the information to the public, as the commenter stated that the 

information is most sensitive if it is made available too early during the exploration or initial 

development stages. The commenter stated that the success of a well in exploratory areas could 

be inferred if detailed data are provided to the public too soon during the exploration and 

assessment period. The commenter provided an example of such an occurrence: an exploratory 

well completed in December of the reporting year, data reported to the EPA by end of March of 

the following year and then released by the EPA to the public within a few months during the 

same year. The commenter stated that early release of data regarding operating characteristics of 

such wells, including post-flowback flaring/venting volumes, could cause competitive harm if 

made publicly available too early.

The commenter noted that Federal law and State codes allow companies to designate as 

confidential the data obtained from exploratory wells, especially in new discovery areas or areas 

that are being explored for development. The commenter further noted that the original intent of 

State oil and gas commissions to allow withholding of select drilling and production information 

from early release to the public was to allow competitive exploration by searching for new 

pockets of oil or gas and experimenting with new tools and techniques. The commenter stated 

that releasing data on such wells through the GHGRP—despite the fact that they are held 
Page 60 of 186

confidential by other regulatory bodies—could cause substantial competitive harm and lead to a 

loss of investment value. The commenter explained that competitive harm could occur if the 

public could obtain detailed high-resolution operational information on a well-by-well basis and 

on a daily or weekly basis.

The commenter requested that the EPA categorically determine that all information 

associated with exploratory wells, with the exception of well ID and location, be classified as 

CBI for a period of at least 24 months from the start of exploration. The commenter

recommended either of two suggested approaches under the GHGRP: (1) Companies would 

report all data to the EPA as mandated by subpart W, but the EPA would hold the reported data 

as CBI and not include it in its public data release for at least 24 months (this could be 

accomplished by a flagging system (or a “radio button”) in e-GGRT that could also allow for a 

short informative text on why that particular well information is to be maintained confidential); 

or (2) the EPA could set up a deferral system where initial data on exploratory wells will be well 

ID and location information and the remaining data would be backfilled by companies after a 

period of 24 months. The commenter added that neither option would require case-by-case 

review of companies’ information, and both are consistent with the approach taken by state oil 

and gas commissions and are protective of companies’ commercial investment interests.

Response: The EPA reviewed the types of data identified by the commenter as having 

disclosure concerns for exploratory wells: “data regarding operating characteristics...including 

post-flowback flaring/venting volumes.” In our proposed memorandum “Evaluation of 

Competitive Harm from Disclosure of ‘Inputs to Equations’ Data Elements Deferred to March 

31, 2015,” August 2013 (refer to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0929), the EPA stated 

regarding exploratory wells, that because onshore production data are reported under the 
Page 61 of 186

GHGRP at a sub-basin level, as defined by county boundaries, the data are aggregated to a large 

enough scale that disclosure of the data collected under subpart W would not reveal any 

proprietary information about the facility or cost to do business. After further investigation in 

response to the comment received, and review of the state laws protecting these types of data, the 

EPA has determined that, in the following situations which were not specifically considered in 

the proposed rule, early public disclosure of certain deferred inputs to emission equations 

associated with wildcat wells and/or delineation wells could reveal the well productivity, thereby

resulting in the loss of investment value:

 For gas well completions or workovers with hydraulic fracturing, where wildcat wells 

and/or delineation wells are the only wells in a sub-basin that can be used for the 

measurement; and

 For onshore production storage tanks, where wildcat wells and/or delineation wells are 

the only wells in a sub-basin.

The inputs to emission equations (for which reporting was deferred to 2015) that could reveal 

well productivity for wildcat and/or delineation wells in the applicable situations listed above are 

as follows:

 For gas well completions or workovers with hydraulic fracturing, the measured flow rate 

of backflow during well completion (40 CFR 98.236(c)(6)(i)(B));

 For gas well completions or workovers with hydraulic fracturing, the measured flow rate 

of backflow during well workover (40 CFR 98.236 (c)(6)(i)(D)); 

 For gas well completions or workovers with hydraulic fracturing, the total number of 

days of backflow from all wells during completions (40 CFR 98.236 (c)(6)(i)(E));

 For gas well completions or workovers with hydraulic fracturing, the total number of 

days of backflow from all wells during workovers (40 CFR 98.236 (c)(6)(i)(F));

 For onshore production storage tanks, the total volume of oil from all wellhead separators

with wellhead gas-liquid separator oil throughput greater than or equal to 10 barrels per 

day sent to tank(s) in barrels per year (40 CFR 98.236(c)(8)(i)(F)); and

 For onshore production storage tanks, the total volume of sales oil from all wells with oil 

production greater than or equal to 10 barrels/day in barrels per year (40 CFR 

98.236(c)(8)(ii)(A)).
Page 62 of 186

These six inputs to emission equations data elements are themselves a small subset of the 

inputs to emission equations data elements (for which reporting was deferred to 2015) collected 

in subpart W, as there are 90 such inputs to emission equations in subpart W. Further, wildcat 

and delineation wells represent a relatively small percentage of the wells being reported under 

the GHGRP for these data elements. As such, in the interim period before these data are reported 

to the EPA, the EPA will be able to verify the majority of the emissions using the inputs to 

equations that will be reported to the EPA. For the six inputs to emission equations that may be 

delayed for 2 years, the EPA will verify emissions using other data reported to the EPA, and will 

conclude verification upon receipt of the data. The EPA agrees with the commenter that a 2-year 

delay of reporting is sufficient to prevent early public disclosure of these data and will provide

sufficient time for the reporter to thoroughly conduct an assessment of the well. Given the results 

of this evaluation, the EPA determined that, for these six inputs to emission equations, in those 

cases where a reporter has wildcat wells or delineation wells in a sub-basin and these wells meet 

one of the two situations described above, reporters should be provided an option to delay 

reporting of the given input for two reporting years starting in reporting year 2013. There is no 

early public disclosure concern for these inputs for reporting years 2011 and 2012 because 2 

years would already have passed before they are to be reported in March 31, 2015. As a result, 

there is no need to delay reporting for these two reporting years. For reporting years 2013 and 

thereafter, this delay will prevent early public disclosure of information regarding well 

productivity. In such cases, if the 2-year delay in reporting is used, the reporter must report the 

following information in the current reporting year: indicate for each delayed reporting element 

that one of the two situations listed above is true (e.g., for gas well completions or workovers 

with hydraulic fracturing, wildcat wells and/or delineation wells are the only wells in a sub-basin 
Page 63 of 186

that can be used for the measurement). In addition, when reporters report the delayed inputs to 

emission equations after the 2 year delay, they must also report the API well ID numbers for the 

applicable wildcat and/or delineation wells in the sub-basin for which the reporting element was

delayed.

The EPA also determined that additional definitions are necessary in order to clarify and 

specify the types of exploratory wells (delineation and wildcat wells) covered by the 2-year delay 

of reporting option. The EPA is adopting the terms and definitions used to describe delineation 

wells and wildcat wells in the new source performance standards for the oil and gas sector under 

40 CFR part 60, subpart OOOO, as reporters under 40 CFR part 98, subpart W are also 

complying with 40 CFR part 60, subpart OOOO requirements. To minimize confusion for 

reporters and be consistent with 40 CFR part 60, subpart OOOO, the final rule includes the terms 

and definitions of a “delineation well” and “wildcat well,” as used in 40 CFR part 60, subpart 

OOOO. “Delineation well” is defined as “a well drilled in order to determine the boundary of a 

field or producing reservoir.” “Wildcat well” is defined as “a well outside known fields or the 

first well drilled in an oil or gas field where no other oil and gas production exists.”

C. Revision of Recordkeeping Requirements For Facilities Required To Use IVT

1. Summary of Final Amendments to Part 98

The EPA is finalizing the proposed revisions to recordkeeping requirements for facilities 

required to use IVT. For each facility required to use IVT, the facility is required to retain all 

records starting with records for reporting year 2010, including records for subparts not subject 

to using IVT, for 5 years, rather than the 3-year record retention period required for non-IVT 

users. In other words, if any facility subject to using IVT is also subject to a subpart of Part 98 

not listed in Table 2 of this preamble, the facility is required to maintain the records required for 
Page 64 of 186

those other subparts for 5 years. Facilities subject to IVT are also required to maintain a record of 

all inputs to emission equations entered into IVT, in the format provided by IVT. At the time the 

reporter completes entry of data into IVT, the facility is required to download from IVT a file 

that lists the entered data and maintain a copy of the file as a record of the entered inputs. As 

specified in 40 CFR 98.3(g), subpart A, this file may be maintained in electronic or hard copy 

format. Refer to Sections II.C and III.B of the proposal preamble (78 FR 55994, September 11, 

2013) for further discussion of these amendments to the Part 98 recordkeeping requirements 

being finalized in today’s action.

The EPA has added a new “verification software records” provision to the recordkeeping 

section of each subpart listed in Table 2 of this preamble to list all inputs to emission equations 

required to be entered into IVT. As mentioned above, a list of the entered inputs must be 

downloaded from IVT and maintained as records.

We are also revising an error in 40 CFR 98.3(g), as proposed. As discussed in Section 

III.B of the proposal preamble (78 FR 55994, September 11, 2013), in a previous action 

amending this paragraph (76 FR 73866, November 29, 2011), our intention was to amend the 

second sentence of the paragraph regarding record retention duration; however, the third 

sentence regarding record format was inadvertently amended. As a result, as proposed, we are 

removing the second sentence of 40 CFR 98.3(g) and reinstating the previous third sentence of 

40 CFR 98.3(g) (regarding format of records). Refer to Section II.B of this preamble for further 

discussion of this new provision.

2. Summary of Changes Since Proposal

The EPA is making no changes to the proposed revisions to recordkeeping requirements 

for IVT users. To clarify which data are entered into IVT and must be kept as records (i.e., the 
Page 65 of 186

data included in the file generated by IVT to be maintained as a record), the EPA is adding a 

“verification software records” provision to the recordkeeping section of each subpart specified 

in Table 2 of this preamble. Each “verification software records” provision lists the inputs to 

equations required to be entered into IVT and required to be maintained as a record.

3. Summary of Comments and Responses

This section summarizes the significant comments and responses related to the proposed 

amendments to the recordkeeping requirements for IVT users. The EPA’s comment response 

document in Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0929 provides a complete listing of all 

comments and responses related to this topic.

Comment: Three commenters supported the EPA’s extension of the records retention 

period. Eight commenters opposed the EPA’s proposal to extend the record retention time from 3

to 5 years. Five of the eight commenters indicated that this proposed requirement would add 

significantly more burden to owners with multiple reporting facilities, where some facilities 

would be subject to a 3-year record retention schedule and some of which would be subject to a 

5-year record retention period. Three of these commenters presented this argument in the context 

of landfills, where one owner would have multiple landfills, and only certain of the landfills 

would be subject to using IVT due to being subject to subpart C. One of the five commenters 

explained that owners of multiple facilities in remote locations (e.g., offshore production 

platforms, compressor stations, fuel supply terminals) rely on data centers and centralized 

archiving procedures to maintain accurate records and back-up documentation for demonstrating 

compliance for some records. The commenter provided one example of a scenario where an 

owner of multiple facilities subject to subparts C, W, and NN would be subject to use of IVT due 

to subpart C. The commenter indicated that this requirement would create confusion by requiring 
Page 66 of 186

that data maintained in the central data centers be organized according to two different record 

retention periods. Additionally, the commenter asserted, for a given reporter (e.g., gas processing 

plant subject to subparts C and W), some records are maintained on site and other are maintained 

in a central data exchange. The commenter added that the requirement to keep records according 

to two different retention periods would substantially increase the volume of records required. 

Another commenter also pointed out the increased confusion associated with maintaining records 

for multiple record duration periods.

Two commenters contended that this revision conflicts with the justification the EPA 

previously made for requiring 3 years in the 2009 promulgated GHGRP rule, citing that the EPA 

determined it was sufficient time to audit and review, reduces recordkeeping burden, and is 

consistent with recordkeeping requirements in other Federal programs. Two of the commenters 

stated that the EPA did not provide sufficient justification for extending the record retention 

time. Two of the commenters disagreed with the EPA’s rationale that the extra time is needed for 

follow-up with reporters because IVT would generate an immediate flag on a real-time basis of 

any input errors and follow-up could be immediate. One of these commenters further disagreed

with the EPA’s rationale that the extra time would allow the EPA inspectors time for appropriate 

assessment of compliance, because the EPA could accomplish this with timely inspections that 

do not need the extra time.

One commenter expressed concern that the proposed extra retention time would be an 

unfair burden because it only applies to those sources using IVT and not all sources. The 

commenter added that sources using IVT would be unfairly subjected to potential additional 

fines and penalties for noncompliance for an extra 2 years, while other sources would not be 

subject to this noncompliance issue. The commenter concluded that requiring the verification 
Page 67 of 186

IVT users to retain information longer would lead to unjustified prejudices against these source 

categories. 

Six of the eight commenters that opposed the EPA’s proposal to extend the record 

retention time from 3 to 5 years also opposed the EPA’s proposal that this 5-year record retention 

requirement for IVT users be extended to all subparts applicable to a reporter. The six 

commenters opposed this additional requirement for the same reasons they opposed the 5-year 

retention period.

Response: The EPA is finalizing in today’s action this proposed amendment to 

recordkeeping requirements for IVT users as part of the alternative verification approach 

included in today’s amendments. As previously stated in the proposal preamble (September 11, 

2013, 78 FR 55994), the EPA considered whether the current record retention period and record 

format requirements would be sufficient to allow the EPA to perform data verification under this 

alternative verification approach. We considered:

 The time we would need to follow up with reporters to further verify reported GHG 

emissions.

 The desirability of retaining multiple years of data records to allow for appropriate 

assessment of compliance and for analyses of trends for policy analysis purposes.

 The format of records, and whether the current format would be adequate for our 

verification process. For example, we considered whether records of inputs to emission 

equations (for which reporting was deferred to 2015) contained in multiple separate 

documents (as currently allowed under Part 98) would allow an EPA inspector to 

efficiently analyze the consistency of the data elements and use the data elements to

perform calculations to confirm reported GHG emissions.

This revision to the recordkeeping timeframe is part of the new verification approach 

using IVT that is being finalized today. Given the large number of reporters under the subparts 

identified in Table 2 of this preamble (over 2,000 facilities) and the likely increase in follow-up 

activities under the new approach, it is important that relevant records are available to the EPA 

for follow-up activities with facilities, including on-site audits if necessary, regarding potential 
Page 68 of 186

errors, discrepancies, or questions. When an EPA employee visits a facility, it is important that 

the employee be able to examine not only the current year’s records but those from previous 

years as well, because previous years’ data will provide year-to-year comparisons, which are 

useful for verifying the current year’s data. A 5-year record retention period ensures the 

availability of relevant records for the follow-up activities described above. 

Regarding the general comment that this proposed 5-year record retention requirement 

would add significantly more burden to owners with multiple reporting facilities, the EPA 

disagrees with this assertion. Given that reporters are already required to maintain records for 3 

years, the reporter is not required to do anything more than keep the records for an additional 2 

years. Only one commenter provided a description of the additional burden for these types of 

owners. The commenter referred to a scenario where one parent company has multiple facilities 

subject to different combinations of subparts NN, C, and W (where some facilities are in remote 

locations, such as offshore production platforms, compressor stations, and fuel supply terminals). 

As such, the parent company is subject to both a 3-year record duration for some facilities and a 

5-year record duration for other facilities. The commenter described the burden as being 

associated with the need for their records that are maintained in their central data centers to be 

organized according to two different record retention periods. However, the commenter did not 

provide any additional information or data to support their claim that the increased burden 

associated with this scenario would be significant, and the EPA does not understand how saving 

data electronically for an additional 2 years would require significant additional burden. The 

EPA received no comments on its proposed impacts analysis, which concluded that there is no 

additional burden imposed on keeping records for 2 additional years (refer to Section V of the 

proposal preamble, September 11, 2013, 78 FR 55994). Lastly, if a parent company does not 
Page 69 of 186

want to maintain some facilities’ records for 3 years and others for 5 years, there is nothing in 

this rulemaking that prevents owners from maintaining all records for a period of 5 years. 

Regarding the comment that this 5-year record duration requirement conflicts with the 

EPA’s justification in the 2009 promulgated GHGRP rule that the 3-year duration is adequate, 

the EPA’s rationales for extending the recordkeeping period under the new verification approach 

using IVT do not conflict with the previous justification for the 3-year recordkeeping 

requirement in the 2009 rulemaking because the 2009 GHGRP rule (74 FR 56260) did not 

include the alternative verification approach being finalized today. Since the IVT approach was 

not part of the 2009 rulemaking, the previous consideration did not take into account this new 

approach that is being finalized today. Further, at the time the previous justification was made, 

not only was there no IVT approach, the inputs to equations, which were necessary for verifying 

emissions under the 2009 rule, were required to be reported timely with the annual reports. In 

light of the subsequent changes to the verification approach and input reporting, it is 

unreasonable to suggest that the previous justification for a 3-year recordkeeping period still 

applies. The commenter did not identify or explain any deficiency in the EPA’s rationales for 

extending the record keeping period to accommodate the IVT approach.

Regarding the comment that this 5-year record duration requirement is inconsistent with 

recordkeeping requirements in other Federal programs, the other Federal programs referred to by 

the commenter (i.e., Department of Energy (DOE) and Acid Rain Program (ARP)) are not using 

the alternative verification approach associated with today’s action. As such, comparison to DOE 

or ARP reporting programs is not appropriate. The EPA also notes that the EPA’s National 

Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants require 5-year record retention (see 40 CFR 

63.10(b)).
Page 70 of 186

Regarding the comment that the EPA does not need extra time to allow for follow-up 

with reporters because IVT would generate an immediate flag on a real-time basis of any input 

errors and follow-up could be immediate, based on its experience with data verification for 

reporting years 2010 through 2012, the EPA anticipates situations where the verification 

summary will indicate discrepancies between reported GHG emissions and the GHG emission 

equation results calculated by IVT as well as other verification results that will require further 

attention. In certain situations, the EPA will need additional time to follow up with these 

reporters to resolve discrepancies, as further described above.

Regarding the comment that the EPA does not need extra time because the EPA could 

accomplish this alternative verification approach with “timely inspections,” as further described 

above, the EPA anticipates more direct follow-up activities under the alternative verification 

approach associated with today’s action. Given the large number of sources reporting to the 

GHGRP and limited resources, any direct follow-up with facilities would be more effective with 

the ability to access 5 years of data.

In response to the comment that the proposed extra retention time would be an unfair 

burden because certain sources would be unfairly subjected to potential additional fines and 

penalties for noncompliance for an extra 2 years, it is important to note that different facilities

within the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program are subject to different verifications approaches

(reporting inputs to emissions equations versus using IVT). Different verification approaches

necessitate different reporting and record keeping requirements to ensure the success of the 

individual verification approach. Further, we do not believe that the 5-year record retention 

period is complex or otherwise difficult or burdensome to implement; if a facility uses IVT, it 

must keep all of its record for 5 years. Given that a reporter is already required to maintain 
Page 71 of 186

records for 3 years, this 5-year recordkeeping requirement does not require any action beyond 

keeping these records for an additional 2 years. In any event, the commenters did not provide any 

information to support the claim that 2 additional years of record maintenance would somehow 

trigger additional fines and penalties. Further, the commenter provided no comment on the 

EPA’s proposed impacts analysis, which concluded that there is no additional burden imposed on 

keeping records for 2 additional years (refer to Section V of the proposal preamble, September 

11, 2013, 78 FR 55994).

Regarding the comments opposing extending the 5-year record retention requirement to 

all subparts for IVT users, the EPA proposed this provision because during a site visit, if 

questions arise regarding the accuracy of equation inputs entered into IVT, it may be necessary 

to examine other recordkeeping information not entered into IVT, such as a monitoring plan or 

recordkeeping information in a different subpart, in order to fully investigate the accuracy of the 

data at issue. For example, a lime production facility with natural gas-fired kilns may report 

combustion emissions under subpart C, CO2 process emissions from lime kilns under subpart S, 

and CO2 supply under subpart PP. As part of the site visit, the EPA may check for 

inconsistencies in the quantities of CO2 collected and transferred off site (reported under subpart 

PP) compared with the CO2 process emissions reported under subpart S. Specifically, if a facility 

reported collecting 32,000 metric tons under subpart PP but reported generating only 30,000 

metric tons of CO2 in their lime kilns, then the EPA may need to check the records and review 

the monitoring plan for both subpart S and PP to determine why this inconsistency occurred. If 

this facility also elected to report the natural gas combusted (i.e., the facility elects not to use IVT 

for subpart C), then the EPA would also use the fuel quantity data to check for unexpected 

inconsistencies in the subpart S data using parameters such as the ratio of CO2 emissions to fuel 
Page 72 of 186

consumption and looking for significant changes in such parameters when compared to data 

from previous years. As part of this process, the EPA may examine the monitoring plan 

associated with all of the subparts reported by this facility to ensure that the correct monitoring 

was conducted by the facility. In this example, if facilities were allowed to retain records for only

3 years for subparts for which IVT was not used, the EPA’s verification and compliance 

activities would be impacted by incomplete records for subparts C and PP when compared with 

subpart S. As the above example illustrates, records necessary to verify data submitted by a 

facility using IVT may include that facility’s data from subparts not subject to IVT. It is

therefore necessary to ensure that all data necessary for verification are available, and this 5-year 

record retention period requirement will provide assurance of on-site data availability. The EPA 

received no additional rationale opposing this provision beyond the rationales presented against 

the 5-year record duration requirement. The EPA received no details to contradict the EPA’s 

proposed impacts analysis, which concluded that this proposed requirement would impose no 

additional burden (refer to Section V of the proposal preamble, September 11, 2013, 78 FR 

55994). As such, the EPA is finalizing the proposed requirement for IVT users to maintain 

records for all subparts for a period of 5 years.

Comment: One commenter suggested that the recordkeeping section of each subpart be 

modified to clearly specify which records related to IVT must be maintained. The commenter 

argued that e-GGRT is a reporting tool, but not a regulation, such that it would not be 

appropriate for IVT to dictate which records must be maintained.

Response: The EPA had requested comment on whether additional specificity within the 

recordkeeping requirements of each subpart would improve the clarity of the specific records 

that are required to be retained. After considering the commenter’s request, the EPA agrees with 
Page 73 of 186

the recommendation to specify each record that reporters must maintain. In the final rule, each 

subpart listed in Table 2 of this preamble includes, in the recordkeeping section, a new 

“verification software records” provision that specifies each data element in that subpart that 

must be entered into IVT and maintained as a record.

D. Addition of Reporting Requirements for Certain Facilities Required to Use IVT

1. Summary of Final Amendments to Part 98

The EPA is finalizing the proposed addition of new reporting requirements for facilities 

required to use IVT for subparts E, G, H, P, Q, S, V, X, and AA of part 98, with changes to the 

proposed amendments for subparts E, V, Y, and AA, as discussed in Section II.D.2 of this 

preamble. The final list of new data elements being added in today’s action is in Table 4 of this 

preamble.

Table 4—New Data Elements Being Finalized in Today’s Action for Subparts E, G, H, P, 

Q, S, V, X, and AA of Part 98

Subpart Subpart Name New Data Element Description

E Adipic Acid Production If only cyclohexane is oxidized to produce adipic 

acid: the annual quantity of cyclohexane (tons) used to 

produce adipic acid. If materials other than 

cyclohexane are oxidized to produce adipic acid: the 

annual quantity of cyclohexanone and cyclohexanol 

mixture (metric tons) used to produce adipic acid.

Annual percent nitrous oxide (N2O) emission 

reduction for all production units combined.

G Ammonia Production Annual ammonia production (metric tons, sum of all 

process units reported within subpart G).

Annual methanol production (metric tons) for each 

process unit. 

H Cement Production Annual clinker production (metric tons).

Annual average clinker carbon dioxide (CO2) 

emission factor for the facility, averaged across all 

kilns (metric tons CO2/metric ton clinker produced).

Annual average cement kiln dust (CKD) CO2

emission factor for the facility, averaged across all 

kilns (metric tons CO2/metric ton CKD produced).
Page 74 of 186

Subpart Subpart Name New Data Element Description

P Hydrogen Production Name and annual quantity (metric tons) of each 

carbon-containing fuel and feedstock.

Annual methanol production (metric tons) for each 

process unit.

Q Iron and Steel Production If you use the carbon mass balance method in 40 CFR 

98.173(b)(1) to determine CO2 emissions: The annual 

mass (metric tons) of all gaseous, liquid, and solid 

fuels (combined) used in process units specified in 

Equations Q-1 through Q-7 of subpart Q, calculated as 

specified in Equation Q-9 of subpart Q being finalized

in today’s action. Do not include fuel used in a 

stationary combustion unit where emissions are 

reported under subpart C.

If you use the carbon mass balance method in 40 CFR 

98.173(b)(1) to determine CO2 emissions: The annual 

mass (metric tons) of all non-fuel material inputs 

(combined) specified in Equations Q-1 through Q-7 of 

subpart Q, calculated as specified in Equation Q-10 of 

subpart Q being finalized in today’s action.

If you use the carbon mass balance method in 40 CFR 

98.173(b)(1) to determine CO2 emissions: The annual 

mass (metric tons) of all solid and liquid products and 

byproducts (combined) specified in Equations Q-1 

through Q-7 of subpart Q, calculated as specified in 

Equation Q-11 of subpart Q being finalized in today’s 

action.

If you use the carbon mass balance method in 40 CFR 

98.173(b)(1) to determine CO2 emissions: The 

weighted average carbon content of all gaseous, 

liquid, and solid fuels (combined) included in 

Equation Q-9 of subpart Q being finalized in today’s 

action, calculated as specified in Equation Q-12 of 

subpart Q being finalized in today’s action.

If you use the carbon mass balance method in 40 CFR 

98.173(b)(1) to determine CO2 emissions: The 

weighted average carbon content of all non-fuel inputs 

to all furnaces (combined) included in Equation Q-10 

of subpart Q being finalized in today’s action, 

calculated as specified in Equation Q-13 of subpart Q 

being finalized in today’s action.

If you use the carbon mass balance method in 40 CFR 

98.173(b)(1) to determine CO2 emissions: The 
Page 75 of 186

Subpart Subpart Name New Data Element Description

weighted average carbon content of all solid and 

liquid products and byproducts from all furnaces 

(combined) included in Equation Q-11 of subpart Q 

being finalized in today’s action, calculated as 

specified in Equation Q-14 of subpart Q being 

finalized in today’s action.

S Lime Manufacturing Annual quantity (tons) of lime product sold, by type.

V Nitric Acid Production Annual percent N2O emission reduction for all nitric 

acid trains combined.

X Petrochemical Production If using the CEMS method to calculate GHG 

emissions: Name and annual quantity (in metric tons) 

of each product. If using the mass balance method to 

calculate GHG emissions: Name and annual quantity 

(in metric tons) of each product used in Equations X1, X-2, and X-3 of subpart X.

If using the CEMS method to calculate GHG 

emissions: Name and annual quantity (in metric tons) 

of each carbon-containing feedstock. If using the mass 

balance method to calculate GHG emissions: Name 

and annual quantity (in metric tons) of each carboncontaining feedstock used in Equations X-1, X-2, and 

X-3 of subpart X.

AA Pulp and Paper 

Manufacturing

For each pulp mill lime kiln: Quantity of calcium 

oxide (CaO) produced (metric tons).

For each pulp mill lime kiln: Percentage of annual 

heat input, individually for each fossil fuel type.

The EPA is also adding six new equations (Equations Q-9 through Q-14 of part 98) to 

subpart Q, as proposed, to specify how to calculate and report each of the six new data elements 

added to subpart Q in this action. Final confidentiality determinations for the data elements 

specified in Table 4 are presented in Section III of this preamble.

2. Summary of Changes Since Proposal

This section provides a brief summary of changes since proposal. The EPA’s rationale for 

these changes is provided in Section II.D.3 of this preamble as part of the EPA’s response to the 
Page 76 of 186

related comment(s). In cases where the EPA is making a change that was not related to a public 

comment, a summary of the rationale is included in this section. 

The changes to the proposed addition of new reporting requirements for facilities

required to use IVT are as follows:

 In the final rule, the new data element for subpart E, 40 CFR 98.56(m), specifies that if 

only cyclohexane is oxidized to produce adipic acid, the reporter must report the annual 

quantity of cyclohexane used to produce adipic acid; otherwise, if materials other than 

cyclohexane are oxidized to produce adipic acid, the reporter must report the annual 

quantity of cyclohexanone and cyclohexanol mixture used to produce adipic acid. Refer 

to Section II.D.3 of this preamble for the rationale for this revision.

 The EPA is not finalizing the proposed addition of two new data elements to subpart AA:

the annual mass of steam generated (proposed as 40 CFR 98.276(m)(1)) and the ratio of 

the unit’s maximum rated heat input capacity to its design rated steam output capacity 

(proposed as 40 CFR 98.276(m)(2)). Refer to Section II.D.3 of this preamble for the 

rationale for this revision.

 The EPA is revising the new data element added to subpart V (40 CFR 98.226(q)) to read 

“annual percent N2O emission reduction for all nitric acid trains combined.” The text 

“nitric acid trains” replaces proposed text “production units” to be consistent with the 

terminology used elsewhere in subpart V. This rationale is documented in “Summary and 

Explanation of Minor Changes Since the Proposed Rule” (Docket ID No. EPA-HQOAR-2010-0929).

 The EPA is not finalizing the proposed addition of the following three new data elements 

to subpart Y, which were proposed to be required to be reported when Equation Y-3 is 

used to calculate flare CO2 emissions: annual quantity of flare gas combusted, annual 

average molecular weight of flare gas combusted, and annual average carbon content of 

flare gas combusted, all for normal operations and startup, shutdown, and malfunction

(SSM) events combined. The EPA included these new elements in the proposal to 

supplement the IVT verification approach by minimizing the need for potential follow-up 

activities (e.g., phone calls, emails, site visits, etc.) to verify reported GHG emissions 

from flares using Equation Y-3 to calculate emissions. Specifically, such information 

would allow the EPA to verify and reconcile potential differences between reported 

emissions and emissions equation results calculated by IVT, and therefore minimize the 

need for follow-up via phone, email or site visits. At the time of proposal, the EPA did 

not consider the proposed new reporting elements in conjunction with the monitoring 

requirements associated with Equation Y-1a and Y-1b. In the process of finalizing this 

rulemaking, the EPA realized that, under the current rule, if the flare gas composition 

(which determines molecular weight and carbon content) is measured weekly or more 

frequently, reporters are required to use either Equation Y-1a or Y-1b to calculate flare 

CO2 emissions. Reporters that either do not measure the composition of flare gas or 

conduct such measurements but less frequently than weekly may use Equation Y-3, 

which does not require such values to calculate routine flare gas emissions. As a result, 
Page 77 of 186

requiring reporters to report annual averages of molecular weight and carbon content 

when using Equation Y-3 would undermine the purpose of Equation Y-3 by requiring 

facilities that do not currently measure these values to now have to determine and report 

these values. These facilities would now have to conduct such measurements or provide 

the values through other means. In the case where reporters do not measure these values, 

they would likely report the values determined for the subset of flare emissions related to 

SSM events, which would not be representative of the annual average, and therefore 

would not be useful for verification. As a result, the EPA is not finalizing the proposed 

reporting of the annual average molecular weight of flare gas combusted and annual 

average carbon content of flare gas combusted, both for normal operations and SSM 

events combined. Further, given that the three proposed data elements were to be used 

together to provide an alternative method of estimating emissions, requiring reporting of 

the annual quantity of flare gas combusted would not be useful in the absence of the other 

two data elements. The EPA is therefore not requiring the reporting of these three data 

elements in the final rule and will continue to rely on the general IVT verification 

approach for verifying flare CO2 emissions using Equation Y-3.

3. Summary of Comments and Responses 

This section summarizes the significant comments and responses related to the proposed 

addition of new reporting requirements for facilities required to use IVT. See the EPA’s 

comment response document in Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0929 for a complete 

listing of all comments and responses related to this topic.

Comment: One commenter suggested that the amount of cyclohexanone and 

cyclohexanol combined (also called ketone-alcohol oil or (KA) used to manufacture adipic acid 

should be substituted for cyclohexane for the verification of N2O emissions from adipic acid 

manufacturing. The commenter indicated that they use an EPA-approved alternate method, as 

allowed under 40 CFR 98.53(a)(2) to report N2O emissions, and the proposed new data element 

would not fairly represent emissions from their manufacturing facility. The commenter explained

that the EPA is assuming that adipic acid is manufactured wholly via the oxidation of 

cyclohexane to KA, which is then further oxidized with nitric acid to adipic acid. The commenter 

stated that this assumes that all the KA used in the nitric acid oxidation comes from cyclohexane 

oxidation and all the KA produced is used to produce adipic acid. However, the commenter 
Page 78 of 186

stated that, in reality, KA can be purchased or sold commercially as well as produced using 

materials other than cyclohexane. The commenter noted that they operate an alternate process to 

produce KA in addition to the cyclohexane-based KA production.

Response: The EPA agrees with the commenter that the proposed new data element for 

subpart E (i.e., 40 CFR 98.56(m), the annual quantity of cyclohexane fed to all production lines, 

combined) will be useful to the EPA for verification purposes for only those reporters that are 

producing all adipic acid from cyclohexane. At proposal, the EPA had assumed that all KA used 

to produce adipic acid was produced by the reporting facility using cyclohexane. Based on this 

commenter input and further consideration, the EPA has determined that there are cases where 

either the KA used by the reporting facility to create adipic acid is purchased from another KA 

producer or the reporting facility uses materials other than cyclohexane to produce KA (such as 

the facility represented by the commenter). In a case where the KA used by the reporting facility 

to create adipic acid is purchased from another KA producer, the reporting facility may not know 

whether and how much cyclohexane was used to produce the KA. Likewise, in cases where the 

reporting facility uses materials other than cyclohexane to produce KA (which may then be used 

to produce adipic acid), the reported annual quantity of cyclohexane used to produce adipic acid 

would not be applicable and, therefore, not useful to EPA for verification of reported GHG 

emissions (representing all adipic acid produced) because this quantity of cyclohexane would 

represent only part (or none, if no cyclohexane is used) of the KA used to produce adipic acid. In 

cases where a reporter is producing KA using materials other than cyclohexane, or where a 

reporter is purchasing KA, the EPA has changed the new data element to be the quantity of KA 

fed to adipic acid production lines. In the final rule, the EPA has revised the new data element to 

specify that if only cyclohexane is oxidized to produce adipic acid, the reporter must report the 
Page 79 of 186

annual quantity of cyclohexane used to produce adipic acid; otherwise, the reporter must report 

the annual quantity of KA used to produce adipic acid. Regarding the comment that some adipic 

acid producers are selling some of the KA produced, these adipic acid producers will be required 

to report a corrected quantity of cyclohexane or KA, as applicable, used to produce adipic acid to 

account for any KA sold. Regarding the comment that some adipic acid producers purchase KA 

to produce adipic acid, these reporters will be required to report the annual quantity of KA used 

to produce adipic acid under 40 CFR 98.56(m)(2).

Comment: One commenter supported the reporting for two new data elements proposed 

to be reported for subpart AA: (1) Quantity of calcium oxide (CaO) produced (metric tons), and 

(2) percent of annual heat input, individually for each fossil fuel type. The commenter opposed 

the reporting of two other data elements proposed to be reported for subpart AA for each 

chemical recovery furnace and chemical recovery combustion unit for which Equation C–2c of 

subpart C is not used to calculate CO2 emissions: (1) Annual mass of steam generated (pound 

(lb) steam), individually for each fossil fuel type and for spent liquor solids, and (2) Ratio of the 

unit’s maximum rated heat input capacity to its design rated steam output capacity (MMBtu/lb 

steam), individually for each fossil fuel type and for spent liquor solids. The commenter 

contended that these requirements are unclear and unnecessary and should be removed from the 

final rule. The commenter asserted that these proposed reporting requirements for pulp mills 

directly contradict the requirement in 40 CFR 98.36(e)(2)(ii)(D) that requires stationary fuel 

combustion units to report the steam and heat/steam ratio only if Equation C-2c is used. 

Regarding recovery units not using Equation C-2c, the commenter indicated that determining 

these two data elements would be overly burdensome because determining steam generation by 

fuel type would be very difficult. The commenter explained that most recovery furnaces only use 
Page 80 of 186

spent pulping liquor as their fuel and some may use other fuels for either start-up or for flame 

stabilization, but, generally, the fuels are liquid; and, other than using a percent of fuel to 

estimate the amount of steam generation per fuel type, the commenter did not know of any other 

method to determine the amount of steam generation per fuel type. As such, the commenter 

requested that these two proposed new data elements (annual mass of steam generated and ratio 

of the unit’s maximum rated heat input capacity to its design rated steam output capacity) be 

eliminated in the final rule.

Response: The EPA thanks the commenter for their support for reporting the quantity of 

CaO produced, and percent of annual heat input, individually for each fossil fuel type. These two 

data elements are added as proposed. Regarding the other two data elements (annual mass of 

steam generated (lb steam), individually for each fossil fuel type and for spent liquor solids, and 

ratio of the unit’s maximum rated heat input capacity to its design rated steam output capacity 

(MMBtu/lb steam), individually for each fossil fuel type and for spent liquor solids), the EPA 

included these new elements in the proposal to supplement the IVT verification approach 

because having such information would allow the EPA to verify and reconcile potential 

differences between reported emissions and emissions equation results calculated by IVT and 

therefore minimize the need for follow-up via phone, email or on-site visit. However, as the EPA 

stated in the proposal preamble (September 11, 2013), the proposal to collect these two data 

elements was also based in part on the EPA’s incorrect assumption that the proposed new 

reporting elements would be readily available for affected facilities, or easily calculated using 

data already required to be collected. In light of the comment, and after further investigation of 

the method available to reporters to calculate steam generated by fuel type, the EPA has learned 

that generating these two new data reporting elements would require a significant investment in 
Page 81 of 186

time. Upon further consideration, the EPA concludes that any potential time saved from the 

reduced follow-up activities due to collection of these two data elements is outweighed by the 

significant resources and time required for the facilities to generate these data. The EPA is 

therefore not requiring the reporting of these two data elements in the final rule and will continue 

to rely on the general IVT verification approach for verifying chemical recovery furnace and 

chemical recovery combustion unit emissions. For the reasons stated above, the EPA is not 

finalizing these two new data elements in today’s final action.

III. Summary of Final Confidentiality Determinations for New Data Elements

A. Summary of Final CBI Determinations

The EPA is finalizing the proposed data category assignment and confidentiality 

determination for each new data element added in this final rule18 except 40 CFR 98.226(q). For 

40 CFR 98.226(q), the EPA is finalizing the proposed data category assignment, but is not 

making any final confidentiality determination. The EPA’s rationale for this change is provided 

in Section III.B of this preamble. 

For the 16 new data elements listed in Table 5 of this preamble, the EPA has determined 

that they are entitled to confidential treatment, as proposed. Specifically, the EPA is finalizing 

the proposed category assignments of these data elements to the “Production/Throughput Data 

that are Not Inputs to Emission Equations” and “Raw Materials Consumed that are Not Inputs to 

Emission Equations” data categories and the application of the categorical confidentiality 

determinations made for these categories in the 2011 final CBI rule (76 FR 30782, May 26, 

2011) to these data elements.

 

18 EPA is not finalizing the addition of all the data elements proposed to be added to the rule. Five data elements are not being 

added to the rule. The EPA’s rationale for this change is provided in Section III.B of this preamble. 
Page 82 of 186

Table 5—Data Elements Assigned to the “Production/Throughput Data that are Not Inputs 

to Emission Equations” and “Raw Materials Consumed that are Not Inputs to Emission 

Equations” Data Categories

Subpart Final Citation Data Element

“Production/Throughput Data that are Not Inputs to Emission Equations” Data Category

G - Ammonia Production 40 CFR 98.76(b)(14) Annual ammonia production 

(metric tons, sum of all process 

lines reported within subpart 

G).

40 CFR 98.76(b)(15) Annual methanol production 

(metric tons) for each process 

unit.

H - Cement Kilns 40 CFR 98.86(b)(16) Annual clinker production 

(metric tons).

P – Hydrogen Production 40 CFR 98.166(e) Annual methanol production 

(metric tons) for each process 

unit.

S - Lime Manufacturing 40 CFR 98.196(b)(18) Annual quantity (tons) of lime 

product sold, by type.

X – Petrochemical 40 CFR 98.246(a)(13) and 

(b)(10)

If using the CEMS method to 

calculate GHG emissions: 

Name and annual quantity (in 

metric tons) of each product. If 

using the mass balance method 

to calculate GHG emissions: 

Name and annual quantity (in 

metric tons) of each product

used in Equations X-1, X-2, and 

X-3 of subpart X.

AA - Pulp and Paper 40 CFR 98.276(l)(1) For each pulp mill lime kiln: 

Quantity of calcium oxide 

(CaO) produced (metric tons).

“Raw Materials Consumed that are Not Inputs to Emission Equations” Data Category

E - Adipic Acid Production 40 CFR 98.56(m) If only cyclohexane is oxidized 

to produce adipic acid, report

the annual quantity of 

cyclohexane (tons) used to 

produce adipic acid. If materials 

other than cyclohexane are 

oxidized to produce adipic acid, 

report the annual quantity of 

cyclohexanone and 

cyclohexanol mixture (tons) 

used to produce adipic acid.
Page 83 of 186

Subpart Final Citation Data Element

P - Hydrogen Production 40 CFR 98.166(b)(7) Name and annual quantity 

(metric tons) of each carboncontaining fuel and feedstock.

Q - Iron and Steel 40 CFR 98.176(e)(6)(i) If you use the carbon mass 

balance method in 40 CFR 

98.173(b)(1) to determine CO2

emissions: The annual mass 

(metric tons) of all gaseous, 

liquid, and solid fuels 

(combined) used in process 

units specified in Equations Q-1 

through Q-7, calculated as 

specified in a new Equation Q-9 

of subpart Q in the final rule 

amendments. Does not include 

fuel used in a stationary 

combustion unit where 

emissions are reported under 

subpart C.

40 CFR 98.176(e)(6)(ii) If you use the carbon mass 

balance method in 40 CFR 

98.173(b)(1) to determine CO2

emissions: The annual mass 

(metric tons) of all non-fuel 

material inputs (combined) 

specified in Equations Q-1 

through Q-7 of subpart Q, 

calculated as specified in a new 

Equation Q-10 of subpart Q in 

the final rule amendments.

40 CFR 98.176(e)(6)(iii) If you use the carbon mass 

balance method in 40 CFR 

98.173(b)(1) to determine CO2

emissions: The annual mass 

(metric tons) of all solid and 

liquid products and byproducts 

(combined) specified in

Equations Q-1 through Q-7, 

calculated as specified in a new 

Equation Q-11 of subpart Q in 

the final rule amendments.
Page 84 of 186

Subpart Final Citation Data Element

40 CFR 98.176(e)(6)(iv) If you use the carbon mass 

balance method in 40 CFR 

98.173(b)(1) to determine CO2

emissions: The weighted 

average carbon content of all 

gaseous, liquid, and solid fuels 

(combined) included in

Equation Q-9 of subpart Q, 

calculated as specified in a new 

Equation Q-12 of subpart Q in 

the final rule amendments.

40 CFR 98.176(e)(6)(v) If you use the carbon mass 

balance method in 40 CFR 

98.173(b)(1) to determine CO2

emissions: The weighted 

average carbon content of all 

non-fuel inputs to all furnaces 

(combined) included in

Equation Q-10 of subpart Q, 

calculated as specified in a new 

Equation Q-13 of subpart Q in 

the final rule amendments.

40 CFR 98.176(e)(6)(vi) If you use the carbon mass 

balance method in 40 CFR 

98.173(b)(1) to determine CO2

emissions: The weighted 

average carbon content of all 

solid and liquid products and 

byproducts from all furnaces 

(combined) included in a new 

Equation Q-11 of subpart Q in 

the final rule amendments, 

calculated as specified in new 

Equation Q-14 of subpart Q in 

the final rule amendments.
Page 85 of 186

Subpart Final Citation Data Element

X – Petrochemical 40 CFR 98.246(a)(12) and (b)(9) If using the CEMS method to 

calculate GHG emissions: 

Name and annual quantity (in 

metric tons) of each carboncontaining feedstock. If using 

the mass balance method to 

calculate GHG emissions: 

Name and annual quantity (in 

metric tons) of each carboncontaining feedstock used in 

Equations X-1, X-2, and X-3 of 

subpart X.

The five new data elements listed below in Table 6 of this preamble were proposed to be 

assigned to the “Unit Process Operating Characteristics that are Not Inputs to Emission 

Equations” category, for which EPA has not established a categorical confidentiality 

determination. Individual confidentiality determinations were proposed for these data elements, 

which are shown in Table 6 below. In today’s action, the EPA is finalizing the categorical 

assignments and confidentiality determinations for four of the five new data elements listed in 

Table 6, as proposed. The EPA revised the confidentiality determination for the new data 

element in subpart V, as shown in Table 6.

Table 6—Final Confidentiality Determinations for New Data Elements Assigned to the 

“Unit/Process Operating Characteristics That Are Not Inputs to Emission Equations” 

Subpart Citation Data Element

Confidentiality 

Determination

Final Rationale for 

Confidentiality 

Determination
Page 86 of 186

Subpart Citation Data Element

Confidentiality 

Determination

Final Rationale for 

Confidentiality 

Determination

E – Adipic 

Acid 

Production

40 CFR 

98.56(n)

Annual percent N2O 

emission reduction for all 

production units combined.

Not CBI The annual facility 

percent N2O reduction 

could not be used to 

calculate adipic acid 

production. The level 

of N2O reductions 

varies by the type of 

abatement technology, 

the environment in 

which the abatement 

technology is 

operating, the age of 

the abatement 

technology, the age of 

the catalyst used, and 

the maintenance level 

of the abatement 

technology.

H -

Cement 

Kilns

40 CFR 

98.86(b)(17)

Annual average clinker 

CO2 emission factor for the 

facility, averaged across all 

kilns (metric tons 

CO2/metric ton clinker 

produced).

CBI This data element 

could be used to back 

calculate a facility’s 

clinker production 

data, which would 

result in competitive 

disadvantage.

40 CFR 

98.86(b)(18)

Annual average cement 

kiln dust (CKD) CO2

emission factor for the 

facility, averaged across all 

kilns (metric tons 

CO2/metric ton CKD 

produced).

CBI This data element 

could provide 

information about the 

efficiency of the 

operation, which 

would result in 

competitive 

disadvantage.

V – Nitric 

Acid 

Production

40 CFR 

98.226(q)

Annual percent N2O 

emission reduction for all 

nitric acid trains combined.

NDa Refer to Section III.B 

of this preamble for the 

rationale for this 

determination.
Page 87 of 186

Subpart Citation Data Element

Confidentiality 

Determination

Final Rationale for 

Confidentiality 

Determination

AA - Pulp 

and Paper

40 CFR 

98.276(l)(2)

For each pulp mill lime 

kiln: Percent of annual heat 

input, individually for each 

fossil fuel type.

Non-CBI Release of this data 

would not result in 

competitive harm 

because lime kiln fossil 

fuel use as a fraction of 

design heat input was 

reported to the EPA as 

part of a 2011 ICR 

survey, and facilities 

reporting via the 

survey made no CBI 

claims regarding fuel 

type and percent of 

design heat input.

a ND = No determination is being finalized.

B. Response to Public Comments

The EPA received several comments related to the proposed confidentiality 

determinations for new data elements. Several commenters provided support for the EPA’s 

proposed confidentiality determinations for new data elements proposed to be reported in 

subparts G, H, S, P, Y, and AA. These comments may be found in the EPA’s comment response 

document in Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0929. We received several comments 

questioning the proposed confidentiality determination of several new data elements, including 

requests that the data elements be treated as confidential, or that the confidentiality be 

determined on a case-by-case basis, and summaries of these comments and EPA’s responses 

thereto are provided below. Additional comments and the EPA’s responses may be found in the 

comment response document noted above.

Comment: One commenter provided comments on confidentiality determinations for new 

data elements proposed for subpart V (Nitric Acid Production). The commenter expressed 

support for the inclusion of the data element “annual percent nitrous oxide emissions reduction 

for all production units combined” (40 CFR 98.226(q)) in the “Unit/Process ‘Operating’
Page 88 of 186

Characteristics that Are Not Inputs to Emission Equations” data category. However, the 

commenter disagreed with the EPA’s proposed determination that the data element is considered 

not confidential. The commenter disagreed with the EPA’s assertion that the data could not be 

used to calculate nitric acid production for an individual train because it is an aggregate number, 

stating that for facility with only a single nitric acid train with N2O abatement, this would not 

hold true. The commenter further asserted that the EPA was incorrect to assume that the data are

publicly available through the voluntary Climate Action Reserve (CAR). The commenter stated 

that although some industry members participate in the CAR and release the information, several 

do not. The commenter contested that it is inappropriate for the EPA to base part of its decision 

on the voluntary reporting of some facilities. As an alternative, the commenter requested that the 

EPA not make a confidentiality determination for this data element as it has done for other data 

elements and, instead, allow individual reporters to assert CBI claims for the data element.

Response: The EPA agrees with the commenter that the annual percent nitrous oxide 

emissions reduction for all production units combined is not publicly available on an annual 

basis through the CAR for all facilities reporting under this subpart, and notes that the EPA did 

not indicate such was the case in the proposed rule. At proposal, the EPA did not specifically 

consider the situation where a facility has only one nitric acid train. After further investigation in 

response to the comment received, the EPA agrees that, in cases where a facility has only one 

nitric acid train with N2O, the data element “annual percent nitrous oxide emissions reduction for 

all production units combined” (40 CFR 98.226(q)) could be used to calculate nitric acid 

production. For facilities with only one nitric acid train with N2O abatement, the reporting of 

annual percent N2O emissions reductions, together with annual N2O emissions from nitric acid 

production (as required to be reported in 40 CFR 98.3(c)(4)), the destruction efficiency (as 
Page 89 of 186

required to be reported in 40 CFR 98.226(i)), and the abatement utilization factor (as required to 

be reported in 40 CFR 98.226(j)), could be used to back-calculate the mass of nitric acid 

produced. Further, the EPA cannot conclude that in specific situations, if a facility adds a nitric 

acid train from one year to the next, and the EPA publishes this data for the year that the facility 

has two nitric acid trains, that data revealing the annual percent nitrous oxide emissions 

reductions for all production units combined could not be back-calculated or estimated for the 

previous year (when the facility had one nitric acid train.)

However, if a facility reports this information to the CAR and it is publicly available, the 

EPA sees no reason why the same data could not be published through the Greenhouse Gas 

Reporting Program, regardless of the number of nitric acid trains at the facility. In light of the 

above, the EPA cannot make a confidentiality determination that applies to all facilities required 

to report this data element. Therefore, the EPA is not finalizing a confidentiality determination

for this data element. In Table 6 of this preamble, the determination for this data element is 

designated as “ND,” which means that no determination has been made. The EPA will make a 

confidentiality determination for this data element on a case by case basis.

Comment: One commenter provided support for the confidentiality determinations for 

three new data elements proposed in subpart Y: annual quantity of flare gas combusted (40 CFR 

98.256(e)(11)(i)); annual average molecular weight of flare gas combusted (40 CFR 

98.256(e)(11)(ii)); and annual average carbon content of flare gas combusted (40 CFR 

98.256(e)(11)(iii)). The three data elements, which are only required when using Equation Y-3 of 

subpart Y, were assigned to the “Unit/Process ‘Operating Characteristics that Are Not Inputs to 

Emission Equations” Data Category” and were not classified as CBI in the proposal. Another 

commenter disagreed with the EPA’s determination that these data are not confidential. The 
Page 90 of 186

commenter explained that the flared gases are process gases, and would reveal characteristics of 

iron and steel processes. The commenter stated that the data elements may reveal operating 

efficiency, provide information that would allow competitors to infer production costs and 

process characteristics, and enable them to gain a competitive advantage. The commenter 

asserted that the data elements are CBI and must be considered CBI in the final rule.

Response: The EPA proposed to collect these three data elements to assist the EPA in 

verifying reported GHG emissions associated with flaring gas when Equation Y-3 is used. The 

EPA is not finalizing the reporting of these data elements. Refer to Section II.D.2 of this 

preamble for further discussion of the EPA’s rationale for this decision.

IV. Impacts of the Final Rule

The EPA has determined that the cost associated with this final action will be $438,000

in the first year of implementation and $55,000 in each subsequent year, as further summarized 

below. A full discussion of the impacts may be found in the memorandum, “Assessment of Cost 

Impacts of 2015 Inputs Proposal – Revisions to Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Verification 

Requirements Under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program,” August 2013, available in the 

EPA’s Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010-0929. 

A. How were the costs of this final rule estimated?

1. Inputs Verification Tool

The data elements required to be used for calculating the annual GHG emissions values,

and the cost associated with collecting these data elements, have not changed from the estimate 

made during the original rulemaking process. The time associated with entry of these inputs to 

emission equations into e-GGRT (including into the new IVT) is expected to be equivalent to the 

time originally anticipated for data entry. Prior to using IVT, as currently required, reporters 
Page 91 of 186

must use their own calculation tool (e.g., calculator, calculation software) to calculate the annual 

GHG emissions values, using the same sets of equations and entering the same data elements that 

they would enter into the tool. 

The EPA does recognize however that there may be some time associated with learning 

the new procedures for IVT and we have estimated a cost of approximately $67 per facility, or 

$383,000 for the first year for all affected facilities. During their first session using IVT, 

reporters would need to spend approximately one hour to become familiar with how the tool 

operates within e-GGRT. The requirement to use IVT would not result in any change in the 

respondent activity of entering these data into e-GGRT. Once the reporter has become familiar 

with the tool, the EPA does not anticipate any additional burden. The cost includes technical, 

clerical, and managerial labor hours. For further information about this cost estimate, refer to the 

memorandum “Assessment of Cost Impacts of 2015 Inputs Final Rule – Revisions to Reporting, 

Recordkeeping, and Verification Requirements Under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program” 

September 2014 and the supporting statement for the information collection request, “Supporting 

Statement, Environmental Protection Agency: Revisions to Reporting and Recordkeeping 

Requirements, and Final Confidentiality Determinations Under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting 

Program, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Control Number 2060-0629, ICR Number 

2300.12,” both available in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0929.

2. New Data Elements 

We are adding 21 new data elements that were not previously required to be reported 

under Part 98 (see Section II.D of this preamble for further discussion). These data elements 

must be reported by facilities in certain subparts that are required to use IVT. Of these 21 data 

elements, seven data elements are related to annual production or raw material usage, which are 
Page 92 of 186

collected by a facility as a routine part of conducting business. For these data elements, we are 

not requiring that reporters comply with specific data collection or monitoring requirements 

beyond the methods commonly used for accounting purposes. The other 14 data elements to be 

reported are calculated values using data currently required to be collected to perform emissions 

calculations. For all of these additional data elements, the EPA has estimated a nominal 

additional cost to report the data element and fulfill the recordkeeping requirements. The total 

costs associated with reporting and recordkeeping for the 21 data elements in 9 subparts is 

$55,000. These costs represent the cost for all affected facilities in the first year.

B. Do the Final Confidentiality Determinations Change the Impacts of the Final Amendments?

The final confidentiality determinations for the new data elements would not affect 

whether and how data are reported and, therefore, would not impose any additional burden on 

sources. Whether a data reporting element is determined to be CBI, not CBI, or emission data, 

the reporting element is reported to the EPA through e-GGRT in the same manner.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: 

Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

This action is not a “significant regulatory action” under the terms of Executive Order 

12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is therefore not subject to review under Executive 

Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

The information collection requirements in this final rule have been submitted for 

approval to the OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The 

Information Collection Request (ICR) document prepared by the EPA has been assigned EPA 
Page 93 of 186

ICR number 2300.12. The information collection requirements are not enforceable until OMB 

approves them.

This action finalizes amendments to reporting and recordkeeping requirements and 

verification procedures for the GHGRP. In addition, the EPA is publishing confidentiality 

determinations for the new data elements added in this action. The amendments to the reporting 

requirements in the source category-specific subparts are not anticipated to result in significant 

burden for reporters. The data elements required to be reported are expected to be readily 

available for affected facilities, or easily calculated using data already required to be collected 

(e.g., a monthly value was previously reported and an annual value is to be reported). 

Impacts associated with the changes to the reporting requirements in each subpart are 

detailed in the memorandum “Assessment of Cost Impacts of 2015 Inputs Final Rule – Revisions 

to Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Verification Requirements under the Greenhouse Gas 

Reporting Program,” September 2014, (see Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0929). 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 the EPA’s regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When this ICR 

is approved by OMB, the Agency will publish a technical amendment to 40 CFR part 9 in the 

Federal Register to display the OMB control number for the approved information collection 

requirements contained in this final rule.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

The RFA generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any 

rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure 
Page 94 of 186

Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small 

businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.

For purposes of assessing the impacts of today’s final rule amendments and 

confidentiality determinations on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) a small business as 

defined by the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) 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; or (3) a small organization that is any notfor-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field. 

After considering the economic impacts of today’s final amendments on small entities, I certify 

that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. The small entities directly regulated by these final rule amendments include small 

businesses across all sectors of the economy encompassed by Part 98, small governmental 

jurisdictions, and small non-profits. We have determined that these facilities will experience

impacts of roughly a first-year cost of $67 per facility for learning new procedures for the 

verification tool and an annual cost of $93 per facility for the recordkeeping and reporting of 21

new data elements.

Although these final rule amendments will not have a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, the EPA nonetheless has tried to reduce the impact of this 

rule on small entities. The EPA supports a “help desk” for the GHGRP, which will be available 

to answer questions on the provisions in this final rulemaking.
Page 95 of 186

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

The final amendments and confidentiality determinations do 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. This action finalizes the 

following requirements: (1) requirements for certain reporters under 23 subparts to use an EPAprovided IVT instead of reporting certain data elements for which disclosure concerns have been 

identified, (2) lengthening the record retention time for reporters required to use IVT, and (3) 

new data elements to be reported for certain reporters using IVT and confidentiality 

determinations for these new data element. As discussed in Section IV of this preamble, for the 

first year, the total collective impact on regulated entities is (1) $383,000, or $67 per entity, for 

using IVT; and (2) $55,000, or $93 per entity, for the final new data elements to be reported. 

Thus, the final amendments and confidentiality determinations are not subject to the 

requirements of sections 202 or 205 of UMRA.

This final rule 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. This action amends reporting and recordkeeping requirements and verification 

procedures for certain reporters in the GHGRP. In addition, the EPA is finalizing confidentiality 

determinations for the new data elements added in today’s action. As discussed in Section IV of 

this preamble, the total collective impact on regulated entities is $438,000 in the first year, and 

$55,000 annually thereafter. Because this impact on each individual facility is estimated to be 

approximately $67 - $160 in the first year and $93 annually thereafter, the EPA has determined 

that the provisions in this action will not significantly impact small governments. In addition, 

because none of the provisions apply specifically to small governments, the EPA has determined 
Page 96 of 186

that the provisions in this action will not uniquely impact small governments. Therefore, this 

action is not subject to the requirements of section 203 of the UMRA. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

The final rule does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct 

effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on 

the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as 

specified in Executive Order 13132. The final amendments and confidentiality determinations 

apply to facilities that directly emit greenhouses gases and fuel and chemicals suppliers. These 

changes do not apply to governmental entities unless the government entity owns a facility that 

directly emits GHGs above threshold levels (such as a large stationary combustion device), so 

relatively few government facilities will be affected. Moreover, for government facilities that are 

subject to the rule, the final revisions will not have a significant cost impact. This final rule also 

does not limit the power of States or localities to collect GHG data and/or regulate GHG 

emissions. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments

This final rule does not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175 

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). The final amendments and confidentiality determinations 

apply directly to facilities that directly emit GHGs or that are suppliers of GHGs. They will not 

have tribal implications unless the tribal entity owns a facility that directly emits GHGs above 

threshold levels (such as a landfill or large combustion device). Relatively few tribal facilities 

would be affected. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
Page 97 of 186

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks

The EPA interprets Executive Order 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 Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This 

final rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not establish an environmental 

standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or 

Use

This final rule is not a “significant energy action” as defined in Executive Order 13211 

(66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy. Part 98 relates to monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping 

and does not impact energy supply, distribution, or use. This final rule amends reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements and verification procedures for the GHGRP. In addition, the EPA is 

finalizing confidentiality determinations for the new data elements added in this rulemaking. 

These final amendments and confidentiality determinations do not make any changes to the 

existing monitoring, recordkeeping, or reporting requirements under Part 98 that affect the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 

(NTTAA), Public Law No. 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs the 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 
Page 98 of 186

(e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business practices) that are 

developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. NTTAA directs the EPA to 

provide Congress, through the OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available 

and applicable voluntary consensus standards. 

This final rulemaking does not involve any new technical standards. Therefore, the 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 lowincome populations in the United States. 

The EPA has determined that these final rule amendments and confidentiality 

determinations will not have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 

effects on minority or low-income populations because the amendments do not affect the level of 

protection provided to human health or the environment. This is because the final amendments 

address information collection and reporting and verification procedures.

K. Congressional Review Act

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business 

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

effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the 
Page 99 of 186

rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. The 

EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to 

publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after 

it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 

804(2). This rule will be effective on [insert date 30 days after publication in the Federal 

Register].
Revisions to Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements, and Confidentiality 

Determinations Under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program; Final Rule

Page 100 of 186

List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 98

Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Greenhouse gases, 

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated:

Gina McCarthy, 

Administrator.
Page 101 of 186

For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Environmental Protection Agency proposes to 

amend title 40, chapter I, of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows: 

PART 98—MANDATORY GREENHOUSE GAS REPORTING

1. The authority citation for part 98 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart A—GENERAL PROVISIONS

2. Section 98.3 is amended by revising paragraphs (c)(4)(vii), (d)(3)(v), (g) 

introductory text, and (g)(2)(i) to read as follows:

§ 98.3 What are the general monitoring, reporting, recordkeeping and verification 

requirements of this part?

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(4) * * *

(vii) The owner or operator of a facility is not required to report the data elements 

specified in Table A-6 to this subpart for calendar years 2010 through 2011 until March 31, 

2013. The owner or operator of a facility is not required to report the data elements specified in 

Table A-7 to this subpart for calendar years 2010 through 2013 until March 31, 2015 (as part of 

the annual report for reporting year 2014), except as otherwise specified in Table A-7 to this 

subpart.

* * * * *

(d) * * *

(3) * * *
Page 102 of 186

(v) For each stationary fuel combustion source that meets the criteria specified in § 

98.36(f) of this part, report any facility operating data or process information used for the GHG 

emission calculations. A stationary fuel combustion source that does not meet the criteria 

specified in paragraph §98.36(f) of this part must either report the data specified in this 

paragraph in the annual report or use verification software according to § 98.5(b) of this part in 

lieu of reporting the data specified in this paragraph.

* * * * *

(g) Recordkeeping. An owner or operator that is required to report GHGs under this part 

must keep records as specified in this paragraph. Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, 

retain all required records for at least 3 years from the date of submission of the annual GHG 

report for the reporting year in which the record was generated. The records shall be kept in an 

electronic or hard-copy format (as appropriate) and recorded in a form that is suitable for 

expeditious inspection and review. If the owner or operator of a facility is required under § 

98.5(b) to use verification software specified by the Administrator, then all records required for 

the facility under Part 98 must be retained for at least 5 years from the date of submission of the 

annual GHG report for the reporting year in which the record was generated, starting with 

records for reporting year 2010. Upon request by the Administrator, the records required under 

this section must be made available to EPA. Records may be retained off site if the records are 

readily available for expeditious inspection and review. For records that are electronically 

generated or maintained, the equipment or software necessary to read the records shall be made 

available, or, if requested by EPA, electronic records shall be converted to paper documents. You 

must retain the following records, in addition to those records prescribed in each applicable 

subpart of this part:
Page 103 of 186

* * * * *

(2) * * *

(i) The GHG emissions calculations and methods used. For data required by section §

98.5(b) to be entered into verification software specified in § 98.5(b), maintain the entered data 

in the format generated by the verification software according to § 98.5(b). 

* * * * *

3. Section 98.5 is revised to read as follows:

§ 98.5 How is the report submitted?

(a) Each GHG report and certificate of representation for a facility or supplier must be 

submitted electronically in accordance with the requirements of § 98.4 and in a format specified 

by the Administrator. 

(b) For reporting year 2014 and thereafter, you must enter into verification software 

specified by the Administrator the data specified in the verification software records provision in 

each applicable recordkeeping section. For each data element entered into the verification 

software, if the software produces a warning message for the data value and you elect not to 

revise the data value, you may provide an explanation in the verification software of why the 

data value is not being revised.

4. Table A-7 to Subpart A of Part 98 is revised to read as follows:

Table A–7 to Subpart A of Part 98—Data Elements That Are Inputs to Emission Equations 

and for Which the Reporting Deadline Is March 31, 2015

Subpart

Rule citation

(40 CFR part 98)

Specific data elements for which reporting date is 

March 31, 2015 (“All” means all data elements in 

the cited paragraph are not required to be 

reported until March 31, 2015)

A 98.3(d)(3)(v) All.a

C 98.36(b)(9)(iii) Only estimate of the heat input.

a
Page 104 of 186

Subpart

Rule citation

(40 CFR part 98)

Specific data elements for which reporting date is 

March 31, 2015 (“All” means all data elements in 

the cited paragraph are not required to be 

reported until March 31, 2015)

C 98.36(c)(2)(ix) Only estimate of the heat input from each type of fuel 

listed in Table C-2.

a

C 98.36(e)(2)(i) All.a

C 98.36(e)(2)(ii)(A) All.a

C 98.36(e)(2)(ii)(C) Only HHV value for each calendar month in which 

HHV determination is required.a

C 98.36(e)(2)(ii)(D) All.a

C 98.36(e)(2)(iv)(A) All.a

C 98.36(e)(2)(iv)(C) All.a

C 98.36(e)(2)(iv)(F) All.a

C 98.36(e)(2)(ix)(D) All.a

C 98.36(e)(2)(ix)(E) All.a

C 98.36(e)(2)(ix)(F) All.a

E 98.56(g) All.

E 98.56(h) All.

E 98.56(j)(4) All.

E 98.56(j)(5) All.

E 98.56(j)(6) All.

E 98.56(l) All.

H 98.86(b)(11) All.

H 98.86(b)(13) Name of raw kiln feed or raw material.

L 98.126(b)(1) Only data used in calculating the absolute errors and 

data used in calculating the relative errors.

L 98.126(b)(2) All.

L 98.126(b)(6) Only mass of each fluorine-containing reactant fed 

into the process.
Page 105 of 186

Subpart

Rule citation

(40 CFR part 98)

Specific data elements for which reporting date is 

March 31, 2015 (“All” means all data elements in 

the cited paragraph are not required to be 

reported until March 31, 2015)

L 98.126(b)(7) Only mass of each fluorine-containing product 

produced by the process.

L 98.126(b)(8)(i) Only mass of each fluorine-containing product that is 

removed from the process and fed into the destruction 

device.

L 98.126(b)(8)(ii) Only mass of each fluorine-containing by-product that 

is removed from the process and fed into the 

destruction device.

L 98.126(b)(8)(iii) Only mass of each fluorine-containing reactant that is 

removed from the process and fed into the destruction 

device.

L 98.126(b)(8)(iv) Only mass of each fluorine-containing by-product that 

is removed from the process and recaptured.

L 98.126(b)(8)(v) All.

L 98.126(b)(9)(i) All.

L 98.126(b)(9)(ii) All.

L 98.126(b)(9)(iii) All.

L 98.126(b)(10) All.

L 98.126(b)(11) All.

L 98.126(b)(12) All.

L 98.126(c)(1) Only quantity of the process activity used to estimate 

emissions.

L 98.126(c)(2) All.

L 98.126(d) Only estimate of missing data.

L 98.126(f)(1) All.

L 98.126(g)(1) All.

L 98.126(h)(2) All.
Page 106 of 186

Subpart

Rule citation

(40 CFR part 98)

Specific data elements for which reporting date is 

March 31, 2015 (“All” means all data elements in 

the cited paragraph are not required to be 

reported until March 31, 2015)

O 98.156(d)(2) All.

O 98.156(d)(3) All.

O 98.156(d)(4) All.

Q 98.176(f)(1) All.

W 98.236(c)(1)(i) All.

W 98.236(c)(1)(ii) All.

W 98.236(c)(1)(iii) All.

W 98.236(c)(2)(i) All.

W 98.236(c)(3)(i) All.

W 98.236(c)(3)(ii) Only Calculation Methodology 2.

W 98.236(c)(3)(iii) All.

W 98.236(c)(3)(iv) All.

W 98.236(c)(4)(i)(A) All.

W 98.236(c)(4)(i)(B) All.

W 98.236(c)(4)(i)(C) All.

W 98.236(c)(4)(i)(D) All.

W 98.236(c)(4)(i)(E) All.

W 98.236(c)(4)(i)(F) All.

W 98.236(c)(4)(i)(G) All.

W 98.236(c)(4)(i)(H) All.

W 98.236(c)(4)(ii)(A) All.

W 98.236(c)(5)(i)(D) All.

W 98.236(c)(5)(ii)(C) All.

W 98.236(c)(6)(i)(B) All.b

W 98.236(c)(6)(i)(D) All.b
Page 107 of 186

Subpart

Rule citation

(40 CFR part 98)

Specific data elements for which reporting date is 

March 31, 2015 (“All” means all data elements in 

the cited paragraph are not required to be 

reported until March 31, 2015)

W 98.236(c)(6)(i)(E) All.b

W 98.236(c)(6)(i)(F) All.b

W 98.236(c)(6)(i)(G) Only the amount of natural gas required.

W 98.236(c)(6)(i)(H) Only the amount of natural gas required.

W 98.236(c)(6)(ii)(A) All.

W 98.236(c)(6)(ii)(B) All.

W 98.236(c)(7)(i)(A) Only for Equation W-14A.

W 98.236(c)(8)(i)(F) All.b

W 98.236(c)(8)(i)(K) All.

W 98.236(c)(8)(ii)(A) All.b

W 98.236(c)(8)(ii)(H) All.

W 98.236(c)(8)(iii)(A) All.

W 98.236(c)(8)(iii)(B) All.

W 98.236(c)(8)(iii)(G) All.

W 98.236(c)(12)(ii) All.

W 98.236(c)(12)(v) All.

W 98.236(c)(13)(i)(E) All.

W 98.236(c)(13)(i)(F) All.

W 98.236(c)(13)(ii)(A) All.

W 98.236(c)(13)(ii)(B) All.

W 98.236(c)(13)(iii)(A) All.

W 98.236(c)(13)(iii)(B) All.

W 98.236(c)(13)(v)(A) All.

W 98.236(c)(14)(i)(B) All.

W 98.236(c)(14)(ii)(A) All.
Page 108 of 186

Subpart

Rule citation

(40 CFR part 98)

Specific data elements for which reporting date is 

March 31, 2015 (“All” means all data elements in 

the cited paragraph are not required to be 

reported until March 31, 2015)

W 98.236(c)(14)(ii)(B) All.

W 98.236(c)(14)(iii)(A) All.

W 98.236(c)(14)(iii)(B) All.

W 98.236(c)(14)(v)(A) All.

W 98.236(c)(15)(ii)(A) All.

W 98.236(c)(15)(ii)(B) All.

W 98.236(c)(16)(viii) All.

W 98.236(c)(16)(ix) All.

W 98.236(c)(16)(x) All.

W 98.236(c)(16)(xi) All.

W 98.236(c)(16)(xii) All.

W 98.236(c)(16)(xiii) All.

W 98.236(c)(16)(xiv) All.

W 98.236(c)(16)(xv) All.

W 98.236(c)(16)(xvi) All.

W 98.236(c)(17)(ii) All.

W 98.236(c)(17)(iii) All.

W 98.236(c)(17)(iv) All.

W 98.236(c)(18)(i) All.

W 98.236(c)(18)(ii) All.

W 98.236(c)(19)(iv) All.

W 98.236(c)(19)(vii) All.

Y 98.256(h)(5)(i) Only value of the correction.

Y 98.256(k)(4) Only mole fraction of methane in coking gas.

Y 98.256(n)(3) All (if used in Equation Y–21 to calculate emissions 
Page 109 of 186

Subpart

Rule citation

(40 CFR part 98)

Specific data elements for which reporting date is 

March 31, 2015 (“All” means all data elements in 

the cited paragraph are not required to be 

reported until March 31, 2015)

from equipment leaks).

Y 98.256(o)(4)(vi) Only tank-specific methane composition data and gas 

generation rate data.

AA 98.276(e) All.

CC 98.296(b)(10)(i) All.

CC 98.296(b)(10)(ii) All.

CC 98.296(b)(10)(iii) All.

CC 98.296(b)(10)(iv) All.

CC 98.296(b)(10)(v) All.

CC 98.296(b)(10)(vi) All.

II 98.356(d)(2) All (if conducting weekly sampling).

II 98.356(d)(3) All (if conducting weekly sampling).

II 98.356(d)(4) Only weekly average temperature (if conducting 

weekly sampling).

II 98.356(d)(5) Only weekly average moisture content (if conducting 

weekly sampling).

II 98.356(d)(6) Only weekly average pressure (if conducting weekly 

sampling).

a Required to be reported only by: (1) stationary fuel combustion sources (e.g., individual units, aggregations of 

units, common pipes, or common stacks) subject to subpart C of this part that contain at least one combustion 

unit connected to a fuel-fired electric generator owned or operated by an entity that is subject to regulation of 

customer billing rates by the PUC (excluding generators connected to combustion units subject to 40 CFR part 

98, subpart D) and that are located at a facility for which the sum of the nameplate capacities for all such 

electric generators is greater than or equal to 1 megawatt electric output; and (2) stationary fuel combustion 

sources (e.g., individual units, aggregations of units, common pipes, or common stacks) subject to subpart C of 

this part that do not meet the criteria in (1) of this footnote that elect to report these data elements, as provided 

in § 98.36(a), for reporting year 2014.

b This rule citation provides an option to delay reporting of this data element for certain wildcat wells and/or 

delineation wells.

Subpart C—GENERAL STATIONARY FUEL COMBUSTION SOURCES
Page 110 of 186

5. Section 98.36 is amended by:

a. Revising paragraph (a);

b. Revising paragraph (b)(9)(iii) and adding paragraph (b)(9)(iv);

c. Revising paragraphs (c)(2)(ix) and (c)(2)(x);

d. Revising paragraph (e)(2)(ii)(C) and adding paragraph (e)(2)(ii)(E); and

e. Adding paragraph (f).

The revisions and additions read as follows:

§ 98.36 Data reporting requirements.

(a) In addition to the facility-level information required under § 98.3, the annual GHG 

emissions report shall contain the unit-level or process-level data specified in paragraphs (b) 

through (f) of this section, as applicable, for each stationary fuel combustion source (e.g., 

individual unit, aggregation of units, common pipe, or common stack) except as otherwise 

provided in this paragraph. For the data specified in paragraphs (b)(9)(iii), (c)(2)(ix), (e)(2)(i), 

(e)(2)(ii)(A), (e)(2)(ii)(C), (e)(2)(ii)(D), (e)(2)(iv)(A), (e)(2)(iv)(C), (e)(2)(iv)(F), and 

(e)(2)(ix)(D) through (F) of this section, the owner or operator of a stationary fuel combustion 

source that does not meet the criteria specified in paragraph (f) of this section may elect either to 

report the data specified in this sentence in the annual report or to use verification software 

according to § 98.5(b) in lieu of reporting these data. If you elect to use this verification 

software, you must use the verification software according to § 98.5(b) for all of these data that 

apply to the stationary fuel combustion source.

(b) * * *

(9) * * *
Page 111 of 186

(iii) An estimate of the heat input from each type of fuel listed in Table C–2 of this 

subpart that was combusted in the unit during the report year.

(iv) The annual CH4 and N2O emissions for each type of fuel listed in Table C–2 of this 

subpart that was combusted in the unit during the report year, expressed in metric tons of each 

gas and in metric tons of CO2e.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(2) * * *

(ix) An estimate of the heat input from each type of fuel listed in Table C–2 of this 

subpart that was combusted in the units sharing the common stack or duct during the report year.

(x) For each type of fuel listed in Table C–2 of this subpart that was combusted during 

the report year in the units sharing the common stack or duct during the report year, the annual 

CH4 and N2O mass emissions from the units sharing the common stack or duct, expressed in 

metric tons of each gas and in metric tons of CO2e.

* * * * *

(e) * * *

(2) * * *

(ii) * * *

(C) The high heat values used in the CO2 emissions calculations for each type of fuel 

combusted during the reporting year, in mmBtu per short ton for solid fuels, mmBtu per gallon 

for liquid fuels, and mmBtu per scf for gaseous fuels. Report a HHV value for each calendar 

month in which HHV determination is required. If multiple values are obtained in a given month, 

report the arithmetic average value for the month. 
Page 112 of 186

* * * * *

(E) For each HHV used in the CO2 emissions calculations for each type of fuel 

combusted during the reporting year, indicate whether the HHV is a measured value or a 

substitute data value.

* * * * *

(f) Each stationary fuel combustion source (e.g., individual unit, aggregation of units, 

common pipe, or common stack) subject to reporting under paragraph (b) or (c) of this section 

must indicate if both of the following two conditions are met:

(1) The stationary fuel combustion source contains at least one combustion unit 

connected to a fuel-fired electric generator owned or operated by an entity that is subject to 

regulation of customer billing rates by the public utility commission (excluding generators that 

are connected to combustion units that are subject to subpart D of this part).

(2) The stationary fuel combustion source is located at a facility for which the sum of the 

nameplate capacities for all electric generators specified in paragraph (f)(1) of this section is 

greater than or equal to 1 megawatt electric output.

6. Section 98.37 is revised to read as follows:

§ 98.37 Records that must be retained.

In addition to the requirements of § 98.3(g), you must retain:

(a) The applicable records specified in §§ 98.34(f) and (g), 98.35(b), and 98.36(e).

(b) Verification software records. For each stationary fuel combustion source that elects 

to use the verification software specified in § 98.5(b) rather than report data specified in 

paragraphs (b)(9)(iii), (c)(2)(ix), (e)(2)(i), (e)(2)(ii)(A), (e)(2)(ii)(C), (e)(2)(ii)(D), (e)(2)(iv)(A), 

(e)(2)(iv)(C), (e)(2)(iv)(F), and (e)(2)(ix)(D) through (F) of this section, you must keep a record 
Page 113 of 186

of the file generated by the verification software for the applicable data specified in paragraphs 

(b)(1) through (b)(36) of this section. Retention of this file satisfies the recordkeeping 

requirement for the data in paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(36) of this section.

(1) Mass of each solid fuel combusted (tons/year) (Equation C-1).

(2) Volume of each liquid fuel combusted (gallons/year) (Equation C-1).

(3) Volume of each gaseous fuel combusted (scf/year) (Equation C-1).

(4) Annual natural gas usage (therms/year) (Equation C-1a).

(5) Annual natural gas usage (mmBtu/year) (Equation C-1b).

(6) Mass of each solid fuel combusted (tons/year) (Equation C-2a).

(7) Volume of each liquid fuel combusted (gallons/year) (Equation C-2a).

(8) Volume of each gaseous fuel combusted (scf/year) (Equation C-2a).

(9) Measured high heat value of each solid fuel, for month (which may be the arithmetic 

average of multiple determinations), or, if applicable, an appropriate substitute data value 

(mmBtu per ton) (Equation C-2b).

(10) Measured high heat value of each liquid fuel, for month (which may be the 

arithmetic average of multiple determinations), or, if applicable, an appropriate substitute data 

value (mmBtu per gallons) (Equation C-2b).

(11) Measured high heat value of each gaseous fuel, for month (which may be the 

arithmetic average of multiple determinations), or, if applicable, an appropriate substitute data 

value (mmBtu per scf) (Equation C-2b).

(12) Mass of each solid fuel combusted during month (tons) (Equation C-2b).

(13) Volume of each liquid fuel combusted during month (gallons) (Equation C-2b).

(14) Volume of each gaseous fuel combusted during month (scf) (Equation C-2b).
Page 114 of 186

(15) Total mass of steam generated by municipal solid waste or each solid fuel 

combustion during the reporting year (pounds steam) (Equation C-2c).

(16) Ratio of the boiler's maximum rated heat input capacity to its design rated steam 

output capacity (MMBtu/ pounds steam) (Equation C-2c).

(17) Annual mass of each solid fuel combusted (short tons/year) (Equation C-3).

(18) Annual average carbon content of each solid fuel (percent by weight, expressed as a 

decimal fraction) (Equation C-3).

(19) Annual volume of each liquid fuel combusted (gallons/year) (Equation C-4).

(20) Annual average carbon content of each liquid fuel (kg C per gallon of fuel) 

(Equation C-4).

(21) Annual volume of each gaseous fuel combusted (scf/year) (Equation C-5).

(22) Annual average carbon content of each gaseous fuel (kg C per kg of fuel) (Equation 

C-5).

(23) Annual average molecular weight of each gaseous fuel (kg/kg-mole) (Equation C-5).

(24) Molar volume conversion factor at standard conditions, as defined in § 98.6 (scf per

kg-mole) (Equation C-5).

(25) Identify for each fuel if you will use the default high heat value from Table C-1, or 

actual high heat value data (Equation C-8).

(26) High heat value of each solid fuel (mmBtu/tons) (Equation C-8).

(27) High heat value of each liquid fuel (mmBtu/gallon) (Equation C-8).

(28) High heat value of each gaseous fuel (mmBtu/scf) (Equation C-8).

(29) Cumulative annual heat input from combustion of each fuel (mmBtu) (Equation C10).
Page 115 of 186

(30) Total quantity of each solid fossil fuel combusted in the reporting year, as defined in 

§ 98.6 (pounds) (Equation C-13).

(31) Total quantity of each liquid fossil fuel combusted in the reporting year, as defined 

in § 98.6 (gallons) (Equation C-13).

(32) Total quantity of each gaseous fossil fuel combusted in the reporting year, as defined 

in § 98.6 (scf) (Equation C-13).

(33) High heat value of the each solid fossil fuel (Btu/lb) (Equation C-13).

(34) High heat value of the each liquid fossil fuel (Btu/gallons) (Equation C-13).

(35) High heat value of the each gaseous fossil fuel (Btu/scf) (Equation C-13).

(36) Fuel-specific carbon based F-factor per fuel (scf CO2/mmBtu) (Equation C-13).

Subpart E—ADIPIC ACID PRODUCTION

7. Section 98.56 is amended by:

a. Revising the introductory text;

b. Removing and reserving paragraphs (b), (c), (j)(1), and (j)(3); and

c. Adding paragraphs (m) and (n). 

The revisions and additions read as follows:

§ 98.56 Data reporting requirements.

In addition to the information required by § 98.3(c), each annual report must contain the

information specified in paragraphs (a) through (n) of this section at the facility level.

* * * * *

(m) If only cyclohexane is oxidized to produce adipic acid and the quantity is known, 

report the information specified in paragraph (m)(1) of this section. If materials other than 
Page 116 of 186

cyclohexane are oxidized to produce adipic acid, report the information specified in paragraph 

(m)(2) of this section.

(1) Annual quantity of cyclohexane (tons) used to produce adipic acid.

(2) Annual quantity of cyclohexanone and cyclohexanol mixture (tons) used to produce 

adipic acid.

(n) Annual percent N2O emission reduction for all production units combined.

8. Section 98.57 is amended by revising the introductory text and adding paragraph 

(i) to read as follows:

§ 98.57 Records that must be retained.

In addition to the information required by § 98.3(g), you must retain the records specified 

in paragraphs (a) through (i) of this section at the facility level:

* * * * *

(i) Verification software records. You must keep a record of the file generated by the 

verification software specified in § 98.5(b) for the applicable data specified in paragraphs (i)(1) 

through (i)(3) of this section. Retention of this file satisfies the recordkeeping requirement for the 

data in paragraphs (i)(1) through (i)(3) of this section.

(1) Annual adipic acid production from each adipic acid production unit (tons)(Equations 

E-2, E-3a, E-3b, E-3c, and E-3d). 

(2) Production rate per test run during the performance test for each production unit test 

run (tons adipic acid produced/hr) (Equation E-1).

(3) Annual adipic acid production per N2O abatement technology during which N2O 

abatement technology was used (tons adipic acid produced) (Equation E-2).

Subpart F—ALUMINUM PRODUCTION
Page 117 of 186

9. Section 98.66 is amended by:

a. Removing and reserving paragraphs (a) and (c)(2); 

b. Revising paragraphs (c)(3), (e)(1), and (f)(1); and

c. Removing and reserving paragraph (g). 

The revisions read as follows:

§ 98.66 Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(3) The last date when the smelter-specific-slope coefficients (or overvoltage emission 

factors) were measured.

* * * * *

(e) * * *

(1) Annual anode consumption if using the method in § 98.63(g).

* * * * *

(f) * * *

(1) Annual paste consumption if using the method in § 98.63(g).

* * * * *

10. Section 98.67 is amended by adding paragraph (i) to read as follows:

§ 98.67 Records that must be retained.

* * * * *

(i) Verification software records. You must keep a record of the file generated by the 

verification software specified in § 98.5(b) for the applicable data specified in paragraphs (i)(1) 
Page 118 of 186

through (i)(30) of this section. Retention of this file satisfies the recordkeeping requirement for 

the data in paragraphs (i)(1) through (i)(30) of this section.

(1) Slope coefficient per potline per month (kg CF4/metric ton Al)/(AE-Mins/cell-day)) 

(Equation F-2).

(2) Anode effect minutes per cell-day per potline per month (AE-Mins/cell-day) 

(Equation F-2).

(3) Anode effect frequency per potline per month (AE/cell‐day) (Equation F-2).

(4) Anode effect duration per potline per month (minutes) (Equation F-2).

(5) Metal production of aluminum per potline per month (metric tons) (Equation F-2).

(6) Overvoltage emission factor per potline per month (kg CF4/metric ton Al) (Equation 

F-3).

(7) Metal production of aluminum per potline per month (metric tons) (Equation F-3).

(8) Weight fraction of C2F6/CF4 per potline per month (kg C2F6/kg CF4) (Equation F-4).

(9) Net annual prebaked anode consumption (metric tons C/metric tons Al) (Equation F5).

(10) Annual metal production of aluminum (metric tons) (Equation F-5).

(11) Sulfur content in baked anode (weight percent) (Equation F-5).

(12) Ash content in baked anode (weight percent) (Equation F-5).

(13) Annual paste consumption (metric ton/metric ton Al) (Equation F-6).

(14) Annual metal production of aluminum (metric tons) (Equation F-6).

(15) Annual emissions of cyclohexane soluble matter (kg/metric ton Al) (Equation F-6).

(16) Binder content of paste (weight percent) (Equation F-6).

(17) Sulfur content of pitch (weight percent) (Equation F-6).
Page 119 of 186

(18) Ash content of pitch (weight percent) (Equation F-6).

(19) Hydrogen content of pitch (weight percent) (Equation F-6).

(20) Sulfur content in calcined coke (weight percent) (Equation F-6).

(21) Ash content in calcined coke (weight percent) (Equation F-6).

(22) Carbon in skimmed dust from Søderberg cells (metric ton C/metric ton Al) 

(Equation F-6).

(23) Initial weight of green anodes (metric tons) (Equation F-7).

(24) Annual hydrogen content in green anodes (metric tons) (Equation F-7).

(25) Annual baked anode production (metric tons) (Equation F-7).

(26) Annual waste tar collected (metric tons) (Equation F-7).

(27) Annual packing coke consumption (metric tons/metric ton baked anode) (Equation 

F-8).

(28) Annual baked anode production (metric tons) (Equation F-8).

(29) Sulfur content in packing coke (weight percent) (Equation F-8).

(30) Ash content in packing coke (weight percent) (Equation F-8).

Subpart G—AMMONIA MANUFACTURING

11. Section 98.76 is amended by:

a. Removing and reserving paragraph (b)(2) and paragraphs (b)(7) through (b)(11); and

b. Adding paragraphs (b)(14) and (b)(15).

The revisions and additions read as follows:

§ 98.76 Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *

(b) * * *
Page 120 of 186

(14) Annual ammonia production (metric tons, sum of all process units reported within 

subpart G).

(15) Annual methanol production for each process unit (metric tons).

12. Section 98.77 is amended by revising the introductory text and adding paragraph 

(c) to read as follows:

§ 98.77 Records that must be retained.

In addition to the records required by § 98.3(g), you must retain the following records 

specified in paragraphs (a) through (c) of this section for each ammonia manufacturing unit.

* * * * *

(c) Verification software records. You must keep a record of the file generated by the 

verification software specified in § 98.5(b) for the applicable data specified in paragraphs (c)(1) 

through (c)(7) of this section. Retention of this file satisfies the recordkeeping requirement for 

the data in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(7) of this section.

(1) Volume of each gaseous feedstock used in month (scf of feedstock) (in Equation G1).

(2) Carbon content of each gaseous feedstock, for month (kg C per kg of feedstock) (in 

Equation G-1).

(3) Molecular weight of each gaseous feedstock per ammonia manufacturing unit with 

gaseous feedstock (kg/kg-mole) (Equation G-1).

(4) Volume of each liquid feedstock used in month (gallons of feedstock) (Equation G-2).

(5) Carbon content of each liquid feedstock, for month (kg C per gallon of feedstock) 

(Equation G-2).

(6) Mass of each solid feedstock used in month (kg of feedstock) (Equation G-3).
Page 121 of 186

(7) Carbon content of each solid feedstock, for month (kg C per kg of feedstock) 

(Equation G-3).

Subpart H—CEMENT PRODUCTION

13. Section 98.86 is amended by:

a. Removing and reserving paragraphs (b)(2), (b)(5), (b)(6), (b)(8), (b)(10), and (b)(12);

b. Revising paragraphs (b)(13) and (b)(15); and

c. Adding paragraphs (b)(16) through (b)(18). 

The revisions and additions read as follows:

§ 98.86 Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(13) Name of raw kiln feed or raw material.

* * * * *

(15) Method used to determine the monthly clinker production from each kiln.

(16) Annual clinker production (metric tons).

(17) Annual average clinker CO2 emission factor for the facility, averaged across all kilns 

(metric tons CO2/metric ton clinker produced).

(18) Annual average CKD CO2 emission factor for the facility, averaged across all kilns 

(metric tons CO2/metric ton CKD produced).

14. Section 98.87 is amended by adding paragraph (c) to read as follows:

§ 98.87 Records that must be retained.

* * * * *
Page 122 of 186

(c) Verification software records. You must keep a record of the file generated by the 

verification software specified in § 98.5(b) for the applicable data specified in paragraphs (c)(1) 

through (c)(17) of this section. Retention of this file satisfies the recordkeeping requirement for 

the data in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(17) of this section.

(1) Identify per kiln per month if clinker is measured directly, or is calculated from raw 

feed (Equation H-2 and the method in § 98.84(d)).

(2) Quantity of raw kiln feed in month from kiln (tons) (Equation H-2 and the method in 

§ 98.84(d)).

(3) Kiln-specific factor per kiln per month (ton clinker per ton raw feed) (Equation H-2 

and the method in § 98.84(d)).

(4) Quantity of clinker produced in month from kiln (tons) (Equation H-2 and the method 

in § 98.84(d)).

(5) Cement kiln dust (CKD) not recycled to the kiln in quarter from kiln (tons) (Equation 

H-2 and the method in § 98.84(d)).

(6) Monthly total CaO content of clinker per kiln (weight fraction) (Equation H-3).

(7) Monthly non-calcined CaO content of clinker per kiln (weight fraction) (Equation H3).

(8) Monthly total MgO content of clinker per kiln (weight fraction) (Equation H-3).

(9) Monthly non-calcined MgO content of clinker per kiln (weight fraction) (Equation H3).

(10) Quarterly total CaO content of cement kiln dust not recycled to each kiln (weight 

fraction) (Equation H-4).
Page 123 of 186

(11) Quarterly non-calcined CaO content of cement kiln dust not recycled to each kiln 

(weight fraction) (Equation H-4).

(12) Quarterly total MgO content of cement kiln dust not recycled to each kiln (weight 

fraction) (Equation H-4).

(13) Quarterly non-calcined MgO content of cement kiln dust not recycled to each kiln 

(weight fraction) (Equation H-4).

(14) The amount of each raw material consumed annually per kiln (tons/yr (dry basis)) 

(Equation H-5).

(15) The amount of each raw kiln feed consumed annually per kiln (tons/yr (dry basis)) 

(Equation H-5).

(16) Organic carbon content of each raw material per kiln, as determined in § 98.84(c). 

Default value is 0.002 weight fraction (Equation H-5).

(17) Organic carbon content of combined raw kiln feed per kiln, as determined in § 

98.84(c). Default value is 0.002 weight fraction (Equation H-5).

Subpart K—FERROALLOY PRODUCTION

15. Section 98.116 is amended by:

a. Revising paragraph (b).

b. Removing and reserving paragraphs (e)(4) and (e)(5); and

c. Revising paragraph (e)(6).

The revisions read as follows:

§ 98.116 Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
Page 124 of 186

(b) If a CEMS is used to measure CO2 emissions, report the annual production for each 

ferroalloy product identified in § 98.110, from each EAF (tons).

* * * * *

(e) * * *

(6) List the method used for the determination of carbon content for each material 

included for the calculation of annual process CO2 emissions for each EAF (e.g., supplier 

provided information, analyses of representative samples you collected).

* * * * *

16. Section 98.117 is amended by revising the introductory text and adding 

paragraph (e) to read as follows:

§ 98.117 Records that must be retained.

In addition to the records required by § 98.3(g), you must retain the records specified in 

paragraphs (a) through (e) of this section for each EAF, as applicable.

* * * * *

(e) Verification software records. You must keep a record of the file generated by the 

verification software specified in § 98.5(b) for the applicable data specified in paragraphs (e)(1) 

through (e)(13) of this section. Retention of this file satisfies the recordkeeping requirement for 

the data in paragraphs (e)(1) through (e)(13) of this section.

(1) Carbon content in reducing agent (percent by weight, expressed as a decimal fraction) 

(Equation K-1).

(2) Annual mass of reducing agent fed, charged, or otherwise introduced into the EAF 

(tons) (Equation K-1).
Page 125 of 186

(3) Carbon content of carbon electrode (percent by weight, expressed as a decimal 

fraction) (Equation K-1).

(4) Annual mass of carbon electrode consumed in the EAF (tons) (Equation K-1).

(5) Carbon content in ore (percent by weight, expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation 

K-1).

(6) Annual mass of ore charged to the EAF (tons) (Equation K-1).

(7) Carbon content in flux material (percent by weight, expressed as a decimal fraction) 

(Equation K-1).

(8) Annual mass of flux material fed, charged, or otherwise introduced into the EAF to 

facilitate slag formation (tons) (Equation K-1).

(9) Carbon content in alloy product (percent by weight, expressed as a decimal fraction) 

(Equation K-1).

(10) Annual mass of alloy product produced/ tapped in the EAF (tons) (Equation K-1).

(11) Carbon content in non-product outgoing material (percent by weight, expressed as a 

decimal fraction) (Equation K-1).

(12) Annual mass of non-product outgoing material removed from EAF (tons) (Equation 

K-1).

(13) CH4 emission factor selected from Table K-1 for each product (kg of CH4

emissions/metric ton of alloy product) (Equation K-3).

Subpart N—GLASS PRODUCTION

17. Section 98.146 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(2) and removing and 

reserving paragraphs (b)(4) and (b)(6) to read as follows:

§ 98.146 Data reporting requirements.
Page 126 of 186

* * * * * 

(b) * * *

(2) Annual quantity of each carbonate-based raw material charged (tons) to all furnaces 

combined.

* * * * *

18. Section 98.147 is amended by revising the introductory text and adding 

paragraph (d) to read as follows:

§ 98.147 Records that must be retained.

In addition to the information required by § 98.3(g), you must retain the records listed in 

paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section.

* * * * *

(d) Verification software records. You must keep a record of the file generated by the 

verification software specified in § 98.5(b) for the applicable data specified in paragraphs (d)(1) 

through (d)(3) of this section. Retention of this file satisfies the recordkeeping requirement for 

the data in paragraphs (d)(1) through (d)(3) of this section.

(1) Annual average decimal mass fraction of carbonate-based mineral in each carbonatebased raw material for each continuous glass melting furnace (specify the default value, if used, 

or the value determined according to § 98.144) (percentage, expressed as a decimal) (Equation 

N-1).

(2) Annual amount of each carbonate-based raw material charged to each continuous 

glass melting furnace (tons) (Equation N-1).
Page 127 of 186

(3) Decimal fraction of each calcination achieved for carbonate-based raw material for 

each continuous glass melting furnace (specify the default value, if used, or the value determined 

according to § 98.144) (percentage, expressed as a decimal) (Equation N-1).

Subpart O—HCFC-22 PRODUCTION AND HFC-23 DESTRUCTION

19. Section 98.156 is amended by:

a. Removing and reserving paragraphs (a)(2), (a)(7) through (a)(10), (b)(1), and (b)(2);

b. Revising paragraph (d) introductory text; and

c. Removing and reserving paragraphs (d)(1), (d)(5), and (e)(1). 

The revisions read as follows:

§ 98.156 Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *

(d) If the HFC–23 concentration measured pursuant to § 98.154(l) is greater than that 

measured during the performance test that is the basis for the destruction efficiency (DE), the 

facility shall report the following:

* * * * *

20. Section 98.157 is amended by adding paragraph (c) to read as follows:

§ 98.157 Records that must be retained.

* * * * *

(c) Verification software records. You must keep a record of the file generated by the 

verification software specified in § 98.5(b) for the applicable data specified in paragraphs (c)(1) 

through (c)(16) of this section. Retention of this file satisfies the recordkeeping requirement for 

the data in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(16) of this section.
Page 128 of 186

(1) Factor to account for the loss of HCFC-22 upstream of the measurement over the 

period, determined pursuant to § 98.154(e) (Equation O-3).

(2) Mass of HCFC-22 that is measured coming out of the production process over the 

period. A period can be one year (kg) (Equation O-3).

(3) Mass of used HCFC-22 that is added to the production process upstream of the output 

measurement over the period. A period can be one year (kg) (Equation O-3).

(4) Mass of HFC-23 generated annually per HCFC-22 production process (metric tons) 

(Equation O-4).

(5) Mass of HFC-23 sent off site for sale annually per HCFC-22 production process 

(metric tons) (Equation O-4).

(6) Mass of HFC-23 sent off site for destruction annually per HCFC-22 production 

process (metric tons) (Equation O-4).

(7) Mass of HFC-23 destroyed on site per HCFC-22 production process (metric tons) 

(Equation O-4).

(8) HFC-23 in storage at end of year per HCFC-22 production process (metric tons) 

(Equation O-4).

(9) HFC-23 in storage at beginning of year per HCFC-22 production process (metric 

tons) (Equation O-4).

(10) Mass of HFC-23 fed into each destruction device annually per HCFC-22 production 

process (metric tons) (Equation O-9 and the calculation method in either § 98.154(l)(1) or § 

98.154(l)(2)).
Page 129 of 186

(11) Identify if each destruction efficiency for each HCFC-22 production process is 

entered directly, or is calculated using § 98.154(l)(1), or is calculated using § 98.154(l)(2) 

(Equation O-9 and the calculation method in either § 98.154(l)(1) or § 98.154(l)(2)).

(12) Destruction efficiency of each destruction device for each HCFC-22 production 

process (decimal fraction) (Equation O-9 and the calculation method in either § 98.154(l)(1) or § 

98.154(l)(2)).

(13) Volumetric flow rate at the inlet of each destruction device for each HCFC-22 

production process from previous test (kg/hr) (Equation O-9 and the calculation method in either 

§ 98.154(l)(1) or § 98.154(l)(2)).

(14) Volumetric flow rate at the inlet of destruction device during test for each HCFC-22 

production process (kg/hr) (Equation O-9 and the calculation method in either § 98.154(l)(1) or § 

98.154(l)(2)).

(15) Concentration of HFC-23 at the inlet of destruction device for each HCFC-22 

production process from previous test (weight fraction) (Equation O-9 and the calculation 

method in either § 98.154(l)(1) or § 98.154(l)(2)).

(16) Concentration of HFC-23 at the inlet of destruction device for each HCFC-22 

production process during test (weight fraction) (Equation O-9 and the calculation method in 

either § 98.154(l)(1) or § 98.154(l)(2)).

Subpart P—HYDROGEN PRODUCTION

21. Section 98.166 is amended by:

a. Revising the introductory text;

b. Removing and reserving paragraphs (b)(2), (b)(5), and (b)(6); and

c. Adding paragraphs (b)(7) and (e).
Page 130 of 186

The revisions and additions read as follows:

§ 98.166 Data reporting requirements.

In addition to the information required by § 98.3(c), each annual report must contain the 

information specified in paragraphs (a) or (b) of this section, as appropriate, and paragraphs (c) 

through (e) of this section:

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(7) Name and annual quantity (metric tons) of each carbon-containing fuel and feedstock.

* * * * * 

(e) Annual methanol production (metric tons) for each process unit.

22. Section 98.167 is amended by revising the introductory text and adding paragraph 

(e) to read as follows:

§ 98.167 Records that must be retained.

In addition to the information required by § 98.3(g), you must retain the records specified 

in paragraphs (a) through (e) of this section for each hydrogen production facility.

* * * * * 

(e) Verification software records. You must keep a record of the file generated by the 

verification software specified in § 98.5(b) for the applicable data specified in paragraphs (e)(1) 

through (e)(12) of this section. Retention of this file satisfies the recordkeeping requirement for 

the data in paragraphs (e)(1) through (e)(12) of this section.

(1) Indicate whether the monthly consumption of each gaseous fuel or feedstock is 

measured as mass or volume (Equation P-1).
Page 131 of 186

(2) Monthly volume of the gaseous fuel or feedstock (scf at standard conditions of 68 °F 

and atmospheric pressure) (Equation P-1).

(3) Monthly mass of the gaseous fuel or feedstock (kg of fuel or feedstock) (Equation P1).

(4) Average monthly carbon content of the gaseous fuel or feedstock (kg C per kg of fuel 

or feedstock) (Equation P-1).

(5) Average monthly molecular weight of the gaseous fuel or feedstock (kg/kg-mole) 

(Equation P-1).

(6) Indicate whether the monthly consumption of each liquid fuel or feedstock is 

measured as mass or volume (Equation P-2).

(7) Monthly volume of the liquid fuel or feedstock (gallons of fuel or feedstock) 

(Equation P-2).

(8) Monthly mass of the liquid fuel or feedstock (kg of fuel or feedstock) (Equation P-2).

(9) Average monthly carbon content of the liquid fuel or feedstock (kg C per gallon of 

fuel or feedstock) (Equation P-2).

(10) Average monthly carbon content of the liquid fuel or feedstock (kg C per kg of fuel 

or feedstock) (Equation P-2).

(11) Monthly mass of solid fuel or feedstock (kg of fuel and feedstock) (Equation P-3).

(12) Average monthly carbon content of the solid fuel or feedstock (kg C per kg of fuel 

and feedstock) (Equation P-3).

Subpart Q—IRON AND STEEL PRODUCTION

23. Section 98.176 is amended by:

a. Revising paragraph (b);
Page 132 of 186

b. Removing and reserving paragraphs (e)(1), (e)(3), (e)(4); 

c. Adding paragraph (e)(6); and 

c. Removing and reserving paragraphs (f)(2) through (f)(4), and (g).

The revisions and additions read as follows:

§ 98.176 Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *

(b) If a CEMS is used to measure CO2 emissions, then you must report the annual 

production quantity for the production unit (in metric tons) for taconite pellets, coke, sinter, iron, 

and raw steel. 

* * * * *

(e) * * *

(6) The information specified in paragraphs (e)(6)(i) through (vi) of this section 

aggregated for all process units for which CO2 emissions were determined using the mass 

balance method in § 98.173(b)(1), except as provided in § 98.174(b)(4). 

(i) The annual mass (metric tons) of all gaseous, liquid, and solid fuels (combined) used 

in process units for which CO2 emissions were determined using Equations Q-1 through Q-7 of 

this section, calculated as specified in Equation Q-9 of this section.

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Eq. Q-9)

Where:

Fuel = Annual mass of all gaseous, liquid, and solid fuels used in process units 

(metric tons).

n = Number of process units where fuel is used.

Fg,i = Annual volume of gaseous fuel combusted (“(Fg)” in Equations Q-1, Q-4 

and Q-7 of this section) for each process (scf).
Page 133 of 186

MWi = Molecular weight of gaseous fuel used in each process (kg/kg-mole).

MVC = Molar volume conversion factor at standard conditions, as defined in § 

98.6. Use 849.5 scf per kg mole if you select 68 °F as standard 

temperature and 836.6 scf per kg mole if you select 60 °F as standard 

temperature.

Fl,i = Annual volume of the liquid fuel combusted (“(Fl)” included in Equation 

Q-1 of this section) for each process unit (gallons).

Fs,i = Annual mass of the solid fuel combusted (“(Fs)” in Equation Q-1 of this 

section) for each process unit (metric tons). 

ρl,i = Density of the liquid fuel (kg/gallon).

0.001 = Conversion factor from kg to metric tons.

(ii) The annual mass (metric tons) of all non-fuel material inputs (combined) specified in

Equations Q-1 through Q-7 of this section, calculated as specified in Equation Q-10 of this 

section.

 

 

 

 

 

(Eq. Q-10)

Where:

NFI = Annual mass of all non-fuel inputs (to all process unit types) specified in 

Equations Q-1 through Q-7 of this section (metric tons).

n = Number of process units, all process types.

O = Annual mass of greenball (taconite) pellets fed to the taconite furnace(s) 

(metric tons).

Iron = Annual mass of molten iron charged to the basic oxygen furnace(s) plus 

annual mass of direct reduced iron charged to the EAF(s) (metric tons).

Scrap = Annual mass of ferrous scrap charged to the basic oxygen furnace(s) and 

EAF(s) (metric tons).

Flux = Annual mass of flux materials charged to the basic oxygen furnace(s) and 

EAF(s) (metric tons).

Carbon = Annual mass of carbonaceous materials (e.g., coal, coke) charged to the 

basic oxygen furnace(s), EAF(s), and direct reduction furnace(s) (metric 

tons).

Coal = Annual mass of coal charged to the coke oven battery(s) (metric tons).
Page 134 of 186

Feed = Annual mass of sinter feed material charged to the sinter process(es) 

(metric tons).

Electrode = Annual mass of carbon electrode consumed in the EAF(s) (metric tons).

Steelin = Annual mass of molten steel charged to the decarburization vessels (metric 

tons).

Ore = Annual mass of iron ore or iron ore pellets fed to the direct reduction 

furnace(s) (metric tons).

Other = Annual mass of other materials charged to the direction reduction 

furnace(s) (metric tons).

(iii) The annual mass (metric tons) of all solid and liquid products and byproducts 

(combined) specified in Equations Q-1 through Q-7 of this section, calculated as specified in 

Equation Q-11 of this section.

 

 

 

(Eq. Q-11)

Where:

Products = Annual mass of all solid and liquid products and by-products (from all 

process units) specified in Equations Q-1 through Q-7 of this section

(metric tons).

n = Number of process units, all types.

P = Annual mass of fired pellets produced by the taconite furnace (metric 

tons).

R = Annual mass of air pollution control residue from all process units (metric 

tons).

Steelout = Annual mass of steel produced by the basic oxygen furnace(s), EAF(s) and 

decarburization vessel(s) (metric tons).

Slag = Annual mass of slag produced by the basic oxygen furnace(s) and EAF(s) 

(metric tons).

Coke = Annual mass of coke produced by the non-recovery coke batteries (metric 

tons).

Sinter = Annual mass of sinter produced from the sinter process(es) (metric tons).

Iron = Annual mass of iron produced from the direct reduction furnace (metric 

tons).
Page 135 of 186

NM = Annual mass of non-metallic materials produced by the direct reduction 

furnace (metric tons).

(iv) The weighted average carbon content of all gaseous, liquid, and solid fuels 

(combined) included in Equation Q-9 of this section, calculated as specified in Equation Q-12 of 

this section.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Eq. Q-12)

Where:

CFavg = Weighted average carbon content of all gaseous, liquid, and solid fuels 

included in Equation Q-9 of this section (weight fraction).

n = Number of gaseous, liquid, and solid fuel input to each process unit as 

used in Equation Q-9.

Cgf,i = Average carbon content of the gaseous fuel used in each process, from the 

fuel analysis results (kg C per kg of fuel).

Clf,i = Carbon content of the liquid fuel used in each process, from the fuel 

analysis results (kg C per gallon of fuel.

Csf = Carbon content of the solid fuel used in each process, from the fuel 

analysis (expressed as a decimal fraction, e.g., 95% = 0.95).

Fuel = Annual mass of all gaseous, liquid, and solid fuels used in process units 

(metric tons), as calculated in Equation Q-9.

(v) The weighted average carbon content of all non-fuel inputs to all process units 

(combined) included in Equation Q-10 of this section, calculated as specified in Equation Q-13 

of this section.

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Eq. Q-13)

Where:

CIavg = Weighted average carbon content of all non-fuel inputs to all process units 

included in Equation Q-10 of this section (weight fraction).
Page 136 of 186

n = Number of non-fuel inputs to all process units as used in Equation Q-10.

NFIi = Annual mass of each non-fuel input used in Equation Q-10 (metric tons).

CNFIi = Average carbon content of each non-fuel input used in Equation Q-10 

(expressed as a decimal fraction).

NFI = Total of all non-fuel inputs to all process units (metric tons).

(vi) The weighted average carbon content of all solid and liquid products and byproducts 

from all process units (combined) included in Equation Q-11 of this section, calculated as 

specified in Equation Q-14 of this section.

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Eq. Q-14)

Where:

CPavg = Weighted average carbon content of all solid and liquid products and 

byproducts from all process units (weight fraction).

n = Number of products and byproducts from each process unit as used in 

Equation Q-11 of this section.

Producti = Annual mass of each product or byproduct used in Equation Q-11 of this 

section (metric tons).

Cp,i = Average carbon content of each product or byproduct used in Equation Q11 of this section (expressed as a decimal fraction).

Products = Mass of all products and byproducts from all process units, calculated in 

Equation Q-11 of this section (metric tons).

* * * * *

24. Section 98.177 is amended by revising the introductory text and adding paragraph 

(f) to read as follows:

§ 98.177 Records that must be retained.

In addition to the records required by § 98.3(g), you must retain the records specified in 

paragraphs (a) through (f) of this section, as applicable. Facilities that use CEMS to measure 
Page 137 of 186

emissions must also retain records of the verification data required for the Tier 4 Calculating 

Methodology in § 98.36(e).

* * * * *

(f) Verification software records. You must keep a record of the file generated by the 

verification software specified in § 98.5(b) for the applicable data specified in paragraphs (f)(1) 

through (f)(9) of this section. Retention of this file satisfies the recordkeeping requirement for 

the data in paragraphs (f)(1) through (f)(9) of this section.

(1) The data in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) through (f)(1)(xxv) of this section for each applicable 

taconite indurating furnace for which the carbon mass balance method of reporting is used.

(i) Annual mass of each solid fuel (metric tons) (Equation Q-1).

(ii) Carbon content of each solid fuel, from the fuel analysis (expressed as a decimal 

fraction) (Equation Q-1).

(iii) Annual volume of each gaseous fuel (scf) (Equation Q-1).

(iv) Average carbon content of each gaseous fuel, from the fuel analysis results (kg C per 

kg of fuel) (Equation Q-1).

(v) Molecular weight of each gaseous fuel (kg/kg-mole) (Equation Q-1).

(vi) Annual volume of each liquid fuel (gallons) (Equation Q-1).

(vii) Carbon content of each liquid fuel, from the fuel analysis results (kg C per gallon of 

fuel) (Equation Q-1).

(viii) Annual mass of the greenball (taconite) pellets fed to the furnace (metric tons) 

(Equation Q-1).

(ix) Carbon content of the greenball (taconite) pellets, from the carbon analysis results 

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-1).
Page 138 of 186

(x) Annual mass of fired pellets produced by the furnace (metric tons) (Equation Q-1).

(xi) Carbon content of the fired pellets, from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a 

decimal fraction) (Equation Q-1).

(xii) Annual mass of air pollution control residue collected (metric tons) (Equation Q-1).

(xiii) Carbon content of the air pollution control residue, from the carbon analysis results 

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-1).

(xiv) Annual mass of each other solid input containing carbon fed to each furnace (metric 

tons) (Equation Q-1).

(xv) Carbon content of each other solid input containing carbon fed to each furnace 

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-1).

(xvi) Annual mass of each other solid output containing carbon produced by each furnace 

(metric tons) (Equation Q-1).

(xvii) Carbon content of each other solid output containing carbon (expressed as a 

decimal fraction) (Equation Q-1).

(xviii) Annual mass of each other gaseous input containing carbon fed to each furnace 

(metric tons) (Equation Q-1).

(xix) Carbon content of each other gaseous input containing carbon fed to each furnace 

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-1).

(xx) Annual mass of each other gaseous output containing carbon produced by each 

furnace (metric tons) (Equation Q-1).

(xxi) Carbon content of each other gaseous output containing carbon produced by each 

furnace (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-1).
Page 139 of 186

(xxii) Annual mass of each other liquid input containing carbon fed to each furnace 

(metric tons) (Equation Q-1).

(xxiii) Carbon content of each other liquid input containing carbon fed to each furnace 

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-1).

(xxiv) Annual mass of each other liquid output containing carbon produced by each 

furnace (metric tons) (Equation Q-1).

(xxv) Carbon content of each other liquid output containing carbon produced by each 

furnace (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-1).

(2) The data in paragraphs (f)(2)(i) through (f)(2)(xxvi) of this section for each applicable 

basic oxygen process furnace for which the carbon mass balance method of reporting is used.

(i) Annual mass of molten iron charged to the furnace (metric tons) (Equation Q-2).

(ii) Carbon content of the molten iron charged to the furnace, from the carbon analysis 

results (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-2).

(iii) Annual mass of ferrous scrap charged to the furnace (metric tons) (Equation Q-2).

(iv) Carbon content of the ferrous scrap charged to the furnace, from the carbon analysis 

results (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-2).

(v) Annual mass of the flux materials (e.g., limestone, dolomite) charged to the furnace 

(metric tons) (Equation Q-2).

(vi) Carbon content of the flux materials charged to the furnace, from the carbon analysis 

results (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-2).

(vii) Annual mass of the carbonaceous materials (e.g., coal, coke) charged to the furnace 

(metric tons) (Equation Q-2).
Page 140 of 186

(viii) Carbon content of the carbonaceous materials charged to the furnace, from the 

carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-2).

(ix) Annual mass of molten raw steel produced by the furnace (metric tons) (Equation Q2).

(x) Carbon content of the steel produced by the furnace, from the carbon analysis results 

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-2).

(xi) Annual mass of slag produced by the furnace (metric tons) (Equation Q-2).

(xii) Carbon content of the slag produced by the furnace, from the carbon analysis 

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-2).

(xiii) Annual mass of air pollution control residue collected for the furnace (metric tons) 

(Equation Q-2).

(xiv) Carbon content of the air pollution control residue collected for the furnace, from 

the carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-2).

(xv) Annual mass of each other solid input containing carbon fed to each furnace (metric 

tons) (Equation Q-2).

(xvi) Carbon content of each other solid input containing carbon fed to each furnace 

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-2).

(xvii) Annual mass of each other solid output containing carbon produced by each 

furnace (metric tons) (Equation Q-2).

(xviii) Carbon content of each other solid output containing carbon (expressed as a 

decimal fraction) (Equation Q-2).

(xix) Annual mass of each other gaseous input containing carbon fed to each furnace 

(metric tons) (Equation Q-2).
Page 141 of 186

(xx) Carbon content of each other gaseous input containing carbon fed to each furnace 

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-2).

(xxi) Annual mass of each other gaseous output containing carbon produced by each 

furnace (metric tons) (Equation Q-2).

(xxii) Carbon content of each other gaseous output containing carbon produced by each 

furnace (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-2).

(xxiii) Annual mass of each other liquid input containing carbon fed to each furnace 

(metric tons) (Equation Q-2).

(xxiv) Carbon content of each other liquid input containing carbon fed to each furnace 

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-2).

(xxv) Annual mass of each other liquid output containing carbon produced by each 

furnace (metric tons) (Equation Q-2).

(xxvi) Carbon content of each other liquid output containing carbon produced by each 

furnace (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-2).

(3) The data in paragraphs (f)(3)(i) through (f)(3)(xviii) of this section for each applicable 

non-recovery coke oven battery for which the carbon mass balance method of reporting is used.

(i) Annual mass of coal charged to the battery (metric tons) (Equation Q-3).

(ii) Carbon content of the coal, from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal 

fraction) (Equation Q-3).

(iii) Annual mass of coke produced by the battery (metric tons) (Equation Q-3).

(iv) Carbon content of the coke, from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal 

fraction) (Equation Q-3).

(v) Annual mass of air pollution control residue collected (metric tons) (Equation Q-3).
Page 142 of 186

(vi) Carbon content of the air pollution control residue, from the carbon analysis results 

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-3).

(vii) Annual mass of each other solid input containing carbon fed to each battery (metric 

tons) (Equation Q-3).

(viii) Carbon content of each other solid input containing carbon fed to each battery

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-3).

(ix) Annual mass of each other solid output containing carbon produced by each battery

(metric tons) (Equation Q-3).

(x) Carbon content of each other solid output containing carbon (expressed as a decimal 

fraction) (Equation Q-3).

(xi) Annual mass of each other gaseous input containing carbon fed to each battery

(metric tons) (Equation Q-3).

(xii) Carbon content of each other gaseous input containing carbon fed to each battery

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-3).

(xiii) Annual mass of each other gaseous output containing carbon produced by each 

battery (metric tons) (Equation Q-3).

(xiv) Carbon content of each other gaseous output containing carbon produced by each 

battery (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-3).

(xv) Annual mass of each other liquid input containing carbon fed to each battery (metric 

tons) (Equation Q-3).

(xvi) Carbon content of each other liquid input containing carbon fed to each battery

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-3).
Page 143 of 186

(xvii) Annual mass of each other liquid output containing carbon produced by each 

battery (metric tons) (Equation Q-3).

(xviii) Carbon content of each other liquid output containing carbon produced by each 

battery (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-3).

(4) The data in paragraphs (f)(4)(i) through (f)(4)(xxi) of this section for each applicable 

sinter process for which the carbon mass balance method of reporting is used.

(i) Annual volume of the gaseous fuel (scf) (Equation Q-4).

(ii) Carbon content of the gaseous fuel, from the fuel analysis results (kg C per kg of fuel) 

(Equation Q-4).

(iii) Molecular weight of the gaseous fuel (kg/kg-mole) (Equation Q-4).

(iv) Annual mass of sinter feed material (metric tons) (Equation Q-4).

(v) Carbon content of the mixed sinter feed materials that form the bed entering the 

sintering machine, from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation 

Q-4).

(vi) Annual mass of sinter produced (metric tons) (Equation Q-4).

(vii) Carbon content of the sinter pellets, from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a 

decimal fraction) (Equation Q-4).

(viii) Annual mass of air pollution control residue collected (metric tons) (Equation Q-4).

(ix) Carbon content of the air pollution control residue, from the carbon analysis results 

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-4).

(x) Annual mass of each other solid input containing carbon fed to each sinter process

(metric tons) (Equation Q-4).
Page 144 of 186

(xi) Carbon content of each other solid input containing carbon fed to each sinter process

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-4).

(xii) Annual mass of each other solid output containing carbon produced by each sinter 

process (metric tons) (Equation Q-4).

(xiii) Carbon content of each other solid output containing carbon (expressed as a 

decimal fraction) (Equation Q-4).

(xiv) Annual mass of each other gaseous input containing carbon fed to each sinter 

process (metric tons) (Equation Q-4).

(xv) Carbon content of each other gaseous input containing carbon fed to each sinter 

process (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-4).

(xvi) Annual mass of each other gaseous output containing carbon produced by each 

sinter process (metric tons) (Equation Q-4).

(xvii) Carbon content of each other gaseous output containing carbon produced by each 

sinter process (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-4).

(xviii) Annual mass of each other liquid input containing carbon fed to each sinter 

process (metric tons) (Equation Q-4).

(xix) Carbon content of each other liquid input containing carbon fed to each sinter 

process (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-4).

(xx) Annual mass of each other liquid output containing carbon produced by each sinter 

process (metric tons) (Equation Q-4).

(xxi) Carbon content of each other liquid output containing carbon produced by each 

sinter process (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-4).
Page 145 of 186

(5) The data in paragraphs (f)(5)(i) through (f)(5)(xxxi) of this section for each applicable 

electric arc furnace for which the carbon mass balance method of reporting is used.

(i) Annual mass of direct reduced iron (if any) charged to the furnace (metric tons) 

(Equation Q-5).

(ii) Carbon content of the direct reduced iron, from the carbon analysis results (expressed 

as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-5)

(iii) Annual mass of ferrous scrap charged to the furnace (metric tons) (Equation Q-5).

(iv) Carbon content of the ferrous scrap, from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a 

decimal fraction) (Equation Q-5).

(v) Annual mass of flux materials (e.g., limestone, dolomite) charged to the furnace 

(metric tons) (Equation Q-5).

(vi) Carbon content of the flux materials, from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a 

decimal fraction) (Equation Q-5).

(vii) Annual mass of carbon electrode consumed (metric tons) (Equation Q-5).

(viii) Carbon content of the carbon electrode, from the carbon analysis results (expressed 

as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-5).

(ix) Annual mass of carbonaceous materials (e.g., coal, coke) charged to the furnace 

(metric tons) (Equation Q-5).

(x) Carbon content of the carbonaceous materials, from the carbon analysis results 

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-5).

(xi) Annual mass of molten raw steel produced by the furnace (metric tons) (Equation Q5).
Page 146 of 186

(xii) Carbon content of the steel, from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal 

fraction) (Equation Q-5).

(xiii) Annual volume of the gaseous fuel (scf at 60F and 1 atm) (Equation Q-5).

(xiv) Average carbon content of the gaseous fuel, from the fuel analysis results (kg C per 

kg of fuel) (Equation Q-5).

(xv) Molecular weight of the gaseous fuel (kg/kg-mole) (Equation Q-5).

(xvi) Annual mass of slag produced by the furnace (metric tons) (Equation Q-5).

(xvii) Carbon content of the slag, from the carbon analysis (expressed as a decimal 

fraction) (Equation Q-5).

(xviii) Annual mass of air pollution control residue collected (metric tons) (Equation Q5).

(xix) Carbon content of the air pollution control residue, from the carbon analysis results 

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-5).

(xx) Annual mass of each other solid input containing carbon fed to each furnace (metric 

tons) (Equation Q-5).

(xxi) Carbon content of each other solid input containing carbon fed to each furnace 

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-5).

(xxii) Annual mass of each other solid output containing carbon produced by each 

furnace (metric tons) (Equation Q-5).

(xxiii) Carbon content of each other solid output containing carbon (expressed as a 

decimal fraction) (Equation Q-5).

(xxiv) Annual mass of each other gaseous input containing carbon fed to each furnace 

(metric tons) (Equation Q-5).
Page 147 of 186

(xxv) Carbon content of each other gaseous input containing carbon fed to each furnace 

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-5).

(xxvi) Annual mass of each other gaseous output containing carbon produced by each 

furnace (metric tons) (Equation Q-5).

(xxvii) Carbon content of each other gaseous output containing carbon produced by each 

furnace (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-5).

(xxviii) Annual mass of each other liquid input containing carbon fed to each furnace 

(metric tons) (Equation Q-5).

(xxix) Carbon content of each other liquid input containing carbon fed to each furnace 

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-5).

(xxx) Annual mass of each other liquid output containing carbon produced by each 

furnace (metric tons) (Equation Q-5).

(xxxi) Carbon content of each other liquid output containing carbon produced by each 

furnace (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-5).

(6) The data in paragraphs (f)(6)(i) through (f)(6)(xvii) of this section for each applicable 

decarburization vessel for which the carbon mass balance method of reporting is used.

(i) Annual mass of molten steel charged to the vessel (metric tons) (Equation Q-6).

(ii) Carbon content of the molten steel before decarburization, from the carbon analysis 

results (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-6).

(iii) Carbon content of the molten steel after decarburization, from the carbon analysis 

results (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-6).

(iv) Annual mass of air pollution control residue collected (metric tons) (Equation Q-6).
Page 148 of 186

(v) Carbon content of the air pollution control residue, from the carbon analysis results 

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-6).

(vi) Annual mass of each other solid input containing carbon fed to each decarburization 

vessel (metric tons) (Equation Q-6).

(vii) Carbon content of each other solid input containing carbon fed to each 

decarburization vessel (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-6).

(viii) Annual mass of each other solid output containing carbon produced by each 

decarburization vessel (metric tons) (Equation Q-6).

(ix) Carbon content of each other solid output containing carbon (expressed as a decimal 

fraction) (Equation Q-6).

(x) Annual mass of each other gaseous input containing carbon fed to each 

decarburization vessel (metric tons) (Equation Q-6).

(xi) Carbon content of each other gaseous input containing carbon fed to each 

decarburization vessel (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-6).

(xii) Annual mass of each other gaseous output containing carbon produced by each 

decarburization vessel (metric tons) (Equation Q-6).

(xiii) Carbon content of each other gaseous output containing carbon produced by each 

decarburization vessel (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-6).

(xiv) Annual mass of each other liquid input containing carbon fed to each 

decarburization vessel (metric tons) (Equation Q-6).

(xv) Carbon content of each other liquid input containing carbon fed to each 

decarburization vessel (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-6).
Page 149 of 186

(xvi) Annual mass of each other liquid output containing carbon produced by each 

decarburization vessel (metric tons) (Equation Q-6).

(xvii) Carbon content of each other liquid output containing carbon produced by each 

decarburization vessel (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-6).

(7) The data in paragraphs (f)(7)(i) through (f)(7)(xxvii) of this section for each 

applicable direct reduction furnace for which the carbon mass balance method of reporting is 

used.

(i) Annual volume of the gaseous fuel (scf at 68F and 1 atm) (Equation Q-7).

(ii) Average carbon content of the gaseous fuel, from the fuel analysis results (kg C per 

kg of fuel) (Equation Q-7).

(iii) Molecular weight of the gaseous fuel (kg/kg-mole) (Equation Q-7).

(iv) Annual mass of iron ore or iron pellets fed to the furnace (metric tons) (Equation Q7).

(v) Carbon content of the iron ore or iron pellets, from the carbon analysis (expressed as a 

decimal fraction) (Equation Q-7).

(vi) Annual mass of carbonaceous materials (e.g., coal, coke) charged to the furnace 

(metric tons) (Equation Q-7).

(vii) Carbon content of the carbonaceous materials, from the carbon analysis results 

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-7).

(viii) Annual mass of each other material charged to the furnace (metric tons) (Equation 

Q-7).

(ix) Average carbon content of each other material charged to the furnace, from the 

carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-7).
Page 150 of 186

(x) Annual mass of iron produced (metric tons) (Equation Q-7).

(xi) Carbon content of the iron produced, from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a 

decimal fraction) (Equation Q-7).

(xii) Annual mass of non-metallic materials produced by the furnace (metric tons) 

(Equation Q-7).

(xiii) Carbon content of the non-metallic materials produced, from the carbon analysis 

results (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-7).

(xiv) Annual mass of air pollution control residue collected (metric tons) (Equation Q-7).

(xv) Carbon content of the air pollution control residue collected, from the carbon 

analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-7).

(xvi) Annual mass of each other solid input containing carbon fed to each furnace (metric 

tons) (Equation Q-7).

(xvii) Carbon content of each other solid input containing carbon fed to each furnace 

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-7).

(xviii) Annual mass of each other solid output containing carbon produced by each 

furnace (metric tons) (Equation Q-7).

(xix) Carbon content of each other solid output containing carbon (expressed as a decimal 

fraction) (Equation Q-7).

(xx) Annual mass of each other gaseous input containing carbon fed to each furnace 

(metric tons) (Equation Q-7).

(xxi) Carbon content of each other gaseous input containing carbon fed to each furnace 

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-7).
Page 151 of 186

(xxii) Annual mass of each other gaseous output containing carbon produced by each 

furnace (metric tons) (Equation Q-7).

(xxiii) Carbon content of each other gaseous output containing carbon produced by each 

furnace (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-7).

(xxiv) Annual mass of each other liquid input containing carbon fed to each furnace 

(metric tons) (Equation Q-7).

(xxv) Carbon content of each other liquid input containing carbon fed to each furnace 

(expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-7).

(xxvi) Annual mass of each other liquid output containing carbon produced by each 

furnace (metric tons) (Equation Q-7).

(xxvii) Carbon content of each other liquid output containing carbon produced by each 

furnace (expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Q-7).

(8) The data in paragraphs (f)(8)(i) and (f)(8)(ii) of this section for each process unit for 

which the site-specific emission factor method was used.

(i) Average hourly feed or production rate, as applicable, during the test (metric 

tons/hour) (as used in § 98.173(b)(2)(iii)).

(ii) Annual total feed or production, as applicable (metric tons) (as used in § 

98.173(b)(2)(iv)).

(9) Total coal charged to the coke ovens for each process (metric tons/year)(as used in § 

98.173(c)).

Subpart R—LEAD PRODUCTION

25. Section 98.186 is amended by removing and reserving paragraphs (b)(6) and 

(b)(7) and revising paragraph (b)(8) to read as follows:
Page 152 of 186

§ 98.186 Data reporting procedures.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(8) List the method used for the determination of carbon content for each material used 

for the calculation of annual process CO2 emissions using Equation R–1 of this subpart for each 

smelting furnace (e.g., supplier provided information, analyses of representative samples you 

collected).

* * * * *

26. Section 98.187 is amended by revising the introductory text and adding 

paragraph (d) to read as follows:

§ 98.187 Records that must be retained.

In addition to the records required by § 98.3(g), you must retain the records of the 

information specified in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section, as applicable to the smelting 

furnaces at your facility.

* * * * *

(d) Verification software records. You must keep a record of the file generated by the 

verification software specified in § 98.5(b) for the applicable data specified in paragraphs (d)(1) 

through (d)(10) of this section. Retention of this file satisfies the recordkeeping requirement for 

the data in paragraphs (d)(1) through (d)(10) of this section.

(1) Annual mass of lead ore charged to each smelting furnace (tons) (Equation R-1).

(2) Carbon content of the lead ore per furnace, from the carbon analysis results (percent 

by weight, expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation R-1).

(3) Annual mass of lead scrap charged to each smelting furnace (tons) (Equation R-1).
Page 153 of 186

(4) Carbon content of the lead scrap per furnace, from the carbon analysis (percent by 

weight, expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation R-1).

(5) Annual mass of flux materials (e.g., limestone, dolomite) charged to each smelting 

furnace (tons) (Equation R-1).

(6) Carbon content of the flux materials per furnace, from the carbon analysis (percent by 

weight, expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation R-1).

(7) Annual mass of carbonaceous materials (e.g., coal, coke) charged to each smelting 

furnace (tons) (Equation R-1).

(8) Carbon content of the carbonaceous materials per furnace, from the carbon analysis 

(percent by weight, expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation R-1).

(9) Annual mass of each other material containing carbon, other than fuel, fed, charged, 

or otherwise introduced into the smelting furnace (tons) (Equation R-1).

(10) Carbon content of each other material, from the carbon analysis results per furnace 

(percent by weight, expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation R-1).

Subpart S—LIME MANUFACTURING

27. Section 98.196 is amended by:

a. Revising paragraph (b) introductory text;

b. Removing and reserving paragraphs (b)(2), (b)(3), (b)(5), (b)(6), (b)(8), (b)(10), 

(b)(11), and (b)(12); and

c. Adding paragraph (b)(18).

The revisions and addition read as follows:

§ 98.196 Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
Page 154 of 186

(b) If a CEMS is not used to measure CO2 emissions, then you must report the 

information listed in paragraphs (b)(1) through (18) of this section.

* * * * *

(18) Annual quantity (tons) of lime product sold, by type.

28. Section 98.197 is amended by revising the introductory text and adding paragraph 

(c) to read as follows:

§ 98.197 Records that must be retained.

In addition to the records required by § 98.3(g), you must retain the records specified in 

paragraphs (a) through (c) of this section.

* * * * *

(c) Verification software records. You must keep a record of the file generated by the 

verification software specified in § 98.5(b) for the applicable data specified in paragraphs (c)(1) 

through (c)(9) of this section. Retention of this file satisfies the recordkeeping requirement for 

the data in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(9) of this section.

(1) Monthly calcium oxide content for each lime type, determined according to § 

98.194(c) (metric tons CaO/ metric ton lime) (Equation S-1).

(2) Monthly magnesium oxide content for each lime type, determined according to § 

98.194(c) (metric tons MgO/ metric ton lime) (Equation S-1).

(3) Monthly calcium oxide content for each calcined lime byproduct or waste type sold 

(metric tons CaO/ metric ton lime) (Equation S-2).

(4) Monthly magnesium oxide content for each calcined lime byproduct or waste type 

sold (metric tons MgO/ metric ton lime) (Equation S-2).
Page 155 of 186

(5) Calcium oxide content for each calcined lime byproduct or waste type that is not sold 

(metric tons CaO/ metric ton lime) (Equation S-3).

(6) Magnesium oxide content for each calcined lime byproduct or waste type that is not 

sold (metric tons MgO/ metric ton lime) (Equation S-3).

(7) Annual weight or mass of calcined byproducts or wastes for lime type that is not sold 

(tons) (Equation S-3).

(8) Monthly weight or mass of each lime type produced (tons) (Equation S-4).

(9) Monthly weight or mass of each calcined byproducts or wastes sold (tons) (Equation 

S-4).

Subpart U—MISCELLANEOUS USES OF CARBONATE

29. Section 98.216 is amended by removing and reserving paragraphs (b), (e)(1), 

(e)(2), and (f).

30. Section 98.217 is amended by revising the introductory text and adding paragraph 

(e) to read as follows:

§ 98.217 Records that must be retained.

In addition to the records required by § 98.3(g), you must retain the records specified in 

paragraphs (a) through (e) of this section:

* * * * *

(e) Verification software records. You must keep a record of the file generated by the 

verification software specified in § 98.5(b) for the applicable data specified in paragraphs (e)(1) 

through (e)(4) of this section. Retention of this file satisfies the recordkeeping requirement for 

the data in paragraphs (e)(1) through (e)(4) of this section.
Page 156 of 186

(1) Fraction calcination achieved for each particular carbonate type. As an alternative to 

measuring the calcination fraction, a value of 1.0 can be used (decimal fraction) (Equation U-1).

(2) Annual mass of each carbonate type consumed (tons) (Equation U-1).

(3) Annual mass of each input carbonate type (tons) (Equation U-2).

(4) Annual mass of each output carbonate type (tons) (Equation U-2).

Subpart V—NITRIC ACID PRODUCTION

31. Section 98.226 is amended by:

a. Revising the introductory text;

b. Removing and reserving paragraphs (c), (d), (i), (j), (m)(1), (m)(3), (m)(4), (m)(5), 

(m)(6), and (p); and 

c. Adding paragraph (q).

The revisions and addition read as follows:

§ 98.226 Data reporting requirements.

In addition to the information required by § 98.3(c), each annual report must contain the 

information specified in paragraphs (a) through (q) of this section.

* * * * *

(q) Annual percent N2O emission reduction for all nitric acid trains combined.

32. Section 98.227 is amended by revising the introductory text and adding paragraph 

(h) to read as follows:

§ 98.227 Records that must be retained.

In addition to the information required by § 98.3(g), you must retain the records specified 

in paragraphs (a) through (h) of this section for each nitric acid production facility:

* * * * *
Page 157 of 186

(h) Verification software records. You must keep a record of the file generated by the 

verification software specified in § 98.5(b) for the applicable data specified in paragraphs (h)(1) 

through (h)(10) of this section. Retention of this file satisfies the recordkeeping requirement for 

the data in paragraphs (h)(1) through (h)(10) of this section.

(1) Annual nitric acid produced from each nitric acid train (tons nitric acid produced, 

100% acid basis).

(2) Indicate which equation was used to calculate emissions for each nitric acid train.

(3) N2O concentration per test run during the performance test (ppm N2O) (Equation V1).

(4) Volumetric flow rate of effluent gas per test run during the performance test dscf/hr) 

(Equation V-1).

(5) Production rate per test run during the performance test (tons nitric acid produced per 

hour, 100 percent acid basis) (Equation V-1).

(6) Annual nitric acid production from each nitric acid train during which each N2O 

abatement technology was operational (tons nitric acid produced, 100 percent acid basis) 

(Equation V-2).

(7) Destruction efficiency of N2O abatement technology that is used on each nitric acid 

train (decimal fraction of N2O removed from vent stream) (Equation V-3a).

(8) Destruction efficiency of each N2O abatement technology that is used on each nitric 

acid train (decimal fraction of N2O removed from vent stream) (Equation V-3b).

(9) Destruction efficiency of each N2O abatement technology that is used on each nitric 

acid train (decimal fraction of N2O removed from vent stream) (Equation V-3c).
Page 158 of 186

(10) Fraction control factor of each N2O abatement technology that is used on each nitric 

acid train (decimal fraction of total emissions from nitric acid train "t" that are sent to abatement 

technology "n")(Equation V-3c). 

Subpart W—PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS SYSTEMS

33. Section 98.236 is amended by:

a. Revising paragraphs (c)(6)(i)(B), (c)(6)(i)(D), (c)(6)(i)(E), (c)(6)(i)(F), (c)(8)(i)(F), and 

(c)(8)(ii)(A); and

b. Adding paragraph (c)(20).

The revisions and additions read as follows:

§ 98.236 Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(6) * * *

(i) * * *

(B) When using Equation W-10A, measured flow rate of backflow during well 

completion in standard cubic feet per hour. You may delay the reporting of this data element if 

you indicate in the annual report that wildcat wells and/or delineation wells are the only wells 

that can be used for the measurement. If you elect to delay reporting of this data element, you 

must report by the date specified in § 98.236(c)(20) the measured flow rate of backflow during 

well completion and the API Well Number(s) for the wells included in the measurement.

* * * * *

(D) When using Equation W-10A, measured flow rate of backflow during well workover 

in standard cubic feet per hour. You may delay the reporting of this data element if you indicate 
Page 159 of 186

in the annual report that wildcat wells and/or delineation wells are the only wells that can be used 

for the measurement. If you elect to delay reporting of this data element, you must report by the 

date specified in § 98.236(c)(20) the flow rate of backflow during well workover and the API 

Well Number(s) for the well(s) included in the measurement.

(E) When using Equation W-10A, total number of days of backflow from all wells during 

completions. You may delay the reporting of this data element if you indicate in the annual 

report that wildcat wells and/or delineation wells are the only wells included in this number. If 

you elect to delay reporting of this data element, you must report by the date specified in § 

98.236(c)(20) the total number of days of backflow from all wells during completions and the 

API Well Number(s) for the well(s) included in the number.

(F) When using Equation W-10A, total number of days of backflow from all wells during 

workovers. You may delay the reporting of this data element if you indicate in the annual report 

that wildcat wells and/or delineation wells are the only wells included in this number. If you 

elect to delay reporting of this data element, you must report by the date specified in § 

98.236(c)(20) the total number of days of backflow from all wells during workovers and the API 

Well Number(s) for the well(s) included in the number.

* * * * *

(8) * * *

(i) * * *

(F) Total volume of oil from all wellhead separators sent to tank(s) in barrels per year. 

You may delay the reporting of this data element if you indicate in the annual report that only 

wildcat and delineation wells in the sub-basin have wellhead separators. If you elect to delay 

reporting the this data element, you must report by the date specified in § 98.236(c)(20) the total 
Page 160 of 186

volume of oil from all wellhead separators sent to tank(s) and the API Well Number(s) for the 

well(s) included in this volume.

* * * * *

(ii) * * *

(A) Total volume of sales oil from all wells in barrels per year. You may delay the 

reporting of this data element if you indicate in the annual report that wildcat wells and 

delineation wells are the only wells in the sub-basin with oil production greater than or equal to 

10 barrels per day. If you elect to delay reporting of this data element, you must report by the 

date specified in § 98.3236(c)(20) the total volume of sales oil from all wells and the API Well 

Number(s) for the well(s) included in this volume.

* * * * * 

(20) If you elect to delay reporting the information in paragraph (c)(6)(i)(B), (c)(6)(i)(D), 

(c)(6)(i)(E), (c)(6)(i)(F), (c)(8)(i)(F), or (c)(8)(ii)(A) of this section, you must report the 

information required in that paragraph no later than the date specified in paragraphs (c)(20)(i) 

through (c)(20)(iii) of this section, as applicable.

(i) March 31, 2016, for reporting year 2013.

(ii) March 31, 2017, for reporting year 2014.

(iii) The date 2 years following the date specified in § 98.3(b) introductory text, for 

reporting year 2015 and thereafter.

34. Section 98.238 is amended by adding definitions for “Delineation well” and 

“Wildcat well” in alphabetical order to read as follows:

§ 98.238 Definitions.

* * * * * 
Page 161 of 186

Delineation well means a well drilled in order to determine the boundary of a field or 

producing reservoir.

* * * * * 

Wildcat well means a well outside known fields or the first well drilled in an oil or gas 

field where no other oil and gas production exists.

Subpart X—PETROCHEMICAL PRODUCTION

35. Section 98.246 is amended by:

a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory text and paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(4);

b. Adding paragraphs (a)(12) and (a)(13);

c. Revising paragraph (b) introductory text; and

d. Adding paragraphs (b)(9) and (b)(10).

The revisions and additions read as follows:

§ 98.246 Data reporting requirements.

* * * * * 

(a) If you use the mass balance methodology in § 98.243(c), you must report the 

information specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(13) of this section for each type of 

petrochemical produced, reported by process unit.

* * * * * 

(2) The type of petrochemical produced, names of products, and names of carboncontaining feedstocks.

* * * * * 

(4) The temperature (in °F) at which the gaseous feedstock and product volumes used in 

Equation X–1 of this subpart were determined.
Page 162 of 186

* * * * *

(12) Name and annual quantity (in metric tons) of each carbon-containing feedstock 

included in Equations X-1, X-2, and X-3 of § 98.243 of this subpart.

(13) Name and annual quantity (in metric tons) of each product included in Equations X1, X-2, and X-3 of § 98.243 of this subpart.

(b) If you measure emissions in accordance with § 98.243(b), then you must report the 

information listed in paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(10) of this section.

* * * * *

(9) Name and annual quantity (in metric tons) of each carbon-containing feedstock.

(10) Name and annual quantity (in metric tons) of each product.

* * * * *

36. Section 98.247 is amended by revising the introductory text and adding 

paragraph (d) to read as follows:

§ 98.247 Records that must be retained.

In addition to the recordkeeping requirements in § 98.3(g), you must retain the records 

specified in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section, as applicable.

* * * * *

(d) Verification software records. You must keep a record of the file generated by the 

verification software specified in § 98.5(b) for the applicable data specified in paragraphs (d)(1) 

through (d)(30) of this section. Retention of this file satisfies the recordkeeping requirement for 

the data in paragraphs (d)(1) through (d)(30) of this section.

(1) Indicate whether the feedstock is measured as mass or volume (Equation X-1).
Page 163 of 186

(2) Indicate whether you used the alternative to sampling and analysis specified in § 

98.243(c)(4) (Equation X-1).

(3) Volume of gaseous feedstock introduced per month (scf) (Equation X-1).

(4) Mass of gaseous feedstock introduced per month (kg) (Equation X-1).

(5) Average carbon content of the gaseous feedstock per month (kg C per kg of 

feedstock) (Equation X-1).

(6) Molecular weight of gaseous feedstock per month (kg per kg-mole) (Equation X-1).

(7) Indicate whether the gaseous product is measured as mass or volume (Equation X-1).

(8) Volume of gaseous product produced per month (scf) (Equation X-1).

(9) Mass of gaseous product produced per month (kg) (Equation X-1).

(10) Average carbon content of gaseous product (including streams containing CO2 

recovered for sale or use in another process) per month (kg C per kg of product) (Equation X-1).

(11) Molecular weight of gaseous product per month (kg per kg-mole) (Equation X-1).

(12) Molar volume conversion factor of product (scf per kg-mole) (Equation X-1).

(13) Indicate whether feedstock is measured as mass or volume (Equation X-2).

(14) Indicate whether you used the alternative to sampling and analysis specified in § 

98.243(c)(4) (Equation X-2).

(15) Volume of liquid feedstock introduced per month (gallons) (Equation X-2).

(16) Mass of liquid feedstock introduced per month (kg) (Equation X-2).

(17) Average carbon content of liquid feedstock per month (kg C per gallon) (Equation 

X-2).

(18) Average carbon content of liquid feedstock per month (kg C per kg of feedstock) 

(Equation X-2).
Page 164 of 186

(19) Indicate whether product is measured as mass or volume per month (Equation X-2).

(20) Volume of liquid product produced per month (gallons) (Equation X-2).

(21) Mass of liquid product produced per month (kg) (Equation X-2).

(22) Average carbon content of liquid product per month, including organic liquid wastes 

(kg C per gallon) (Equation X-2).

(23) Average carbon content of liquid product, including organic liquid wastes (kg C per 

kg of product) (Equation X-2).

(24) Indicate whether you used the alternative to sampling and analysis specified in § 

98.243(c)(4) (Equation X-3).

(25) Mass of solid feedstock introduced per month (kg) (Equation X-3).

(26) Average carbon content of solid feedstock per month (kg C per kg of feedstock) 

(Equation X-3).

(27) Mass of solid product produced per month (kg) (Equation X-3).

(28) Average carbon content of solid product per month (kg C per kg of product)

(Equation X-3).

(29) Records required in § 98.257(b)(1) through (b)(8) of this section for each flare that 

burns ethylene process off-gas.

(30) Records required in § 98.37 for each stationary fuel combustion unit (or group of 

stationary sources with a common pipe) that burns ethylene process off-gas, except flares.

Subpart Y—PETROLEUM REFINERIES

37. Section 98.256 is amended by: 

a. Revising paragraph (e)(6) and paragraph (e)(7) introductory text;

b. Removing and reserving paragraph (e)(7)(ii);
Page 165 of 186

c. Revising paragraphs (e)(9) and (e)(10);

d. Revising paragraphs (f)(7) and (f)(10) through (f)(13);

e. Removing and reserving paragraph (h)(4);

f. Revising paragraphs (h)(5), (i)(5), (i)(7), and (i)(8);

g. Removing and reserving paragraph (j)(2);

h. Revising paragraphs (j)(5) through (j)(9), (k)(3), (k)(4), (l)(5), and (m)(3);

i. Removing and reserving paragraphs (o)(2)(ii) and (o)(4)(ii) through (o)(4)(iv); 

j. Revising paragraph (o)(4)(v);

k. Removing and reserving paragraphs (o)(6) and (o)(7); and

l. Revising paragraph (p)(2).

The revisions read as follows:

§ 98.256 Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *

(e) * * *

(6) If you use Equation Y–1a of this subpart, an indication of whether daily or weekly 

measurement periods are used, the annual volume of flare gas combusted (in scf/year) and the 

annual average molecular weight (in kg/kg-mole), and annual average carbon content of the flare 

gas (in kg carbon per kg flare gas).

(7) If you use Equation Y–1b of this subpart, an indication of whether daily or weekly 

measurement periods are used, the annual volume of flare gas combusted (in scf/year), the 

annual average CO2 concentration (volume or mole percent), the number of carbon containing 

compounds other than CO2 in the flare gas stream, and for each of the carbon containing 

compounds other than CO2 in the flare gas stream:
Page 166 of 186

* * * * *

(9) If you use Equation Y–3 of this subpart, the number of SSM events exceeding 

500,000 scf/day.

(10) The basis for the value of the fraction of carbon in the flare gas contributed by 

methane used in Equation Y–4 of this subpart.

(f) * * *

(7) If you use Equation Y–6 of this subpart, the annual average exhaust gas flow rate, 

%CO2, and %CO.

* * * * *

(10) If you use Equation Y–8 of this subpart, the basis for the value of the average carbon 

content of coke.

(11) Indicate whether you use a measured value, a unit-specific emission factor, or a 

default for CH4 emissions. If you use a unit-specific emission factor for CH4, report the basis for 

the factor.

(12) Indicate whether you use a measured value, a unit-specific emission factor, or a 

default emission factor for N2O emissions. If you use a unit-specific emission factor for N2O, 

report the basis for the factor.

(13) If you use Equation Y–11 of this subpart, the number of regeneration cycles or 

measurement periods during the reporting year and the average coke burn-off quantity per cycle 

or measurement period.

* * * * *

(h) * * *
Page 167 of 186

(5) If you recycle tail gas to the front of the sulfur recovery plant, indicate whether the 

recycled flow rate and carbon content are included in the measured data under § 98.253(f)(2) and 

(3) of this section. Indicate whether a correction for CO2 emissions in the tail gas was used in 

Equation Y–12 of this subpart. If so, then report:

(i) Indicate whether you used the default (95 percent) or a unit specific correction, and if 

a unit-specific correction was used, report the value of the correction and the approach used. 

(ii) If the following data are not used to calculate the recycling correction factor, report 

the information specified in paragraphs (h)(5)(ii)(A) through (B) of this section.

(A) The annual volume of recycled tail gas (in scf/year) only.

(B) The annual average mole fraction of carbon in the tail gas (in kg-mole C/kg-mole 

gas). 

* * * * *

(i) * * *

(5) If you use Equation Y–13 of this subpart, an indication of whether coke dust is 

recycled to the unit (e.g., all dust is recycled, a portion of the dust is recycled, or none of the dust 

is recycled).

* * * * *

(7) Indicate whether you use a measured value, a unit-specific emission factor or a 

default emission factor for CH4 emissions. If you use a unit-specific emission factor for CH4, 

report the basis for the factor.

(8) Indicate whether you use a measured value, a unit-specific emission factor, or a 

default emission factor for N2O emissions. If you use a unit-specific emission factor for N2O, 

report the basis for the factor.
Page 168 of 186

(j) * * *

(5) If you use Equation Y–14 of this subpart, the basis for the CO2 emission factor used.

(6) If you use Equation Y–15 of this subpart, the basis for the CH4 emission factor used.

(7) If you use Equation Y–16 of this subpart, the basis for the carbon emission factor 

used.

(8) If you use Equation Y–16b of this subpart, the basis for the CO2 emission factor used 

and the basis for the carbon emission factor used.

(9) If you use Equation Y–17 of this subpart, the basis for the CH4 emission factor used.

* * * * *

(k) * * *

(3) The total number of delayed coking units at the facility; the total number of delayed 

coking drums at the facility; and, for each coke drum or vessel, the typical drum outage (i.e. the 

unfilled distance from the top of the drum, in feet).

(4) For each set of coking drums that are the same dimensions, the number of coking 

drums in the set, and the mole fraction of methane in coking gas (in kg-mole CH4/kg-mole gas, 

wet basis).

* * * * *

(l) * * *

(5) The annual volumetric flow discharged to the atmosphere (in scf), and an indication 

of the measurement or estimation method, annual average mole fraction of each GHG above the 

concentration threshold or otherwise required to be reported and an indication of the 

measurement or estimation method, and for intermittent vents, the number of venting events and 

the cumulative venting time.
Page 169 of 186

* * * * *

(m) * * *

(3) For uncontrolled blowdown systems reporting under § 98.253(k), the basis for the 

value of the methane emission factor used for uncontrolled blowdown systems.

* * * * *

(o) * * *

(4) * * *

(v) The basis for the mole fraction of CH4 in vent gas from unstabilized crude oil storage 

tanks.

* * * * *

(p) * * *

(2) The types of materials loaded that have an equilibrium vapor-phase concentration of 

methane of 0.5 volume percent or greater, and the type of vessel (barge, tanker, marine vessel, 

etc.) in which each type of material is loaded.

* * * * *

38. Section 98.257 is amended to read as follows:

§ 98.257 Records that must be retained.

In addition to the records required by § 98.3(g), you must retain the records specified in 

paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section.

(a) The records of all parameters monitored under § 98.255. If you comply with the 

combustion methodology in § 98.252(a), then you must retain under this subpart the records 

required for the Tier 3 and/or Tier 4 Calculation Methodologies in § 98.37 and you must keep 

records of the annual average flow calculations.
Page 170 of 186

(b) Verification software records. You must keep a record of the file generated by the 

verification software specified in § 98.5(b) for the applicable data specified in paragraphs (b)(1) 

through (b)(67) of this section. Retention of this file satisfies the recordkeeping requirement for 

the data in paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(67) of this section.

(1) Volume of flare gas combusted during measurement period (scf) (Equation Y-1b).

(2) Mole percent CO2 concentration in the flare gas stream during the measurement 

period (mole percent) (Equation Y-1b).

(3) Mole percent concentration of compound “x” in the flare gas stream during the 

measurement period (mole percent) (Equation Y-1b).

(4) Carbon mole number of compound “x” in the flare gas stream during the 

measurement period (mole carbon atoms per mole compound) (Equation Y-1b).

(5) Molar volume conversion factor (scf per kg-mole) (Equation Y-1b).

(6) Annual volume of flare gas combusted for each flare during normal operations from 

company records (million (MM) standard cubic feet per year, MMscf/year) (Equation Y-3).

(7) Higher heating value for fuel gas or flare gas for each flare from company records 

(British thermal units per scf, Btu/scf = MMBtu/MMscf) (Equation Y-3).

(8) Volume of flare gas combusted during indexed start-up, shutdown, or malfunction 

event from engineering calculations (scf) (Equation Y-3).

(9) Average molecular weight of the flare gas, from the analysis results or engineering 

calculations for the event (kg/kg-mole) (Equation Y-3).

(10) Molar volume conversion factor (scf per kg-mole) (Equation Y-3).

(11) Average carbon content of the flare gas, from analysis results or engineering 

calculations for the event (kg C per kg flare gas) (Equation Y-3).
Page 171 of 186

(12) Weight fraction of carbon in the flare gas prior to combustion in each flare that is 

contributed by methane from measurement values or engineering calculations (kg C in methane 

in flare gas/ kg C in flare gas) (Equation Y-4).

(13) Annual throughput of unit from company records for each catalytic cracking unit or 

fluid coking unit (barrels/year) (Equation Y-8).

(14) Coke burn-off factor from engineering calculations (default for catalytic cracking 

units = 7.3; default for fluid coking units = 11) (kg coke per barrel of feed) (Equation Y-8).

(15) Carbon content of coke based on measurement or engineering estimate (kg C per kg 

coke) (Equation Y-8).

(16) Value of unit-specific CH4 emission factor, including the units of measure, for each 

catalytic cracking unit, traditional fluid coking unit, catalytic reforming unit, and coke calcining 

unit (calculation method in § 98.253(c)(4)).

(17) Annual activity data (e.g., input or product rate), including the units of measure, in 

units of measure consistent with the emission factor, for each catalytic cracking unit, traditional 

fluid coking unit, catalytic reforming unit, and coke calcining unit (calculation method in § 

98.253(c)(4)).

(18) Value of unit-specific N2O emission factor, including the units of measure, for each 

catalytic cracking unit, traditional fluid coking unit, catalytic reforming unit, and coke calcining 

unit (calculation method in § 98.253(c)(5)).

(19) Annual activity data (e.g., input or product rate), including the units of measure, in 

units of measure consistent with the emission factor, for each catalytic cracking unit, traditional 

fluid coking unit, catalytic reforming unit, and coke calcining unit (calculation method in § 

98.253(c)(5)).
Page 172 of 186

(20) Carbon content of coke based on measurement or engineering estimate (default = 

0.94) (kg C per kg coke) (Equation Y-11).

(21) Volumetric flow rate of sour gas (including sour water stripper gas) feed sent off site 

for sulfur recovery in the year (scf/year) (Equation Y-12).

(22) Mole fraction of carbon in the sour gas feed sent off site for sulfur recovery (kgmole C/kg-mole gas) (Equation Y-12).

(23) Molar volume conversion factor for sour gas sent off site (scf per kg-mole) 

(Equation Y-12).

(24) Volumetric flow rate of sour gas (including sour water stripper gas) fed to the onsite 

sulfur recovery plant (scf/year) (Equation Y-12).

(25) Mole fraction of carbon in the sour gas fed to the onsite sulfur recovery plant (kgmole C/kg-mole gas) (Equation Y-12).

(26) Molar volume conversion factor for onsite sulfur recovery plant (scf per kg-mole) 

(Equation Y-12).

(27) Annual mass of green coke fed to the coke calcining unit from facility records 

(metric tons/year) (Equation Y-13).

(28) Annual mass of marketable petroleum coke produced by the coke calcining unit 

from facility records (metric tons/year) (Equation Y-13).

(29) Annual mass of petroleum coke dust removed from the process through the dust 

collection system of the coke calcining unit from facility records. For coke calcining units that 

recycle the collected dust, the mass of coke dust removed from the process is the mass of coke 

dust collected less the mass of coke dust recycled to the process (metric tons/year) (Equation Y13).
Page 173 of 186

(30) Average mass fraction carbon content of green coke from facility measurement data 

(metric tons C per metric ton green coke) (Equation Y-13).

(31) Average mass fraction carbon content of marketable petroleum coke produced by the 

coke calcining unit from facility measurement data (metric tons C per metric ton petroleum coke 

(Equation Y-13).

(32) Quantity of asphalt blown for each asphalt blowing unit (million barrels per year 

(MMbbl/year)) (Equation Y-14).

(33) Emission factor for CO2 from uncontrolled asphalt blowing from facility-specific 

test data for each asphalt blowing unit (metric tons CO2/MMbbl asphalt blown) (Equation Y-14).

(34) Emission factor for CH4 from uncontrolled asphalt blowing from facility-specific 

test data for each asphalt blowing unit (metric tons CH4/MMbbl asphalt blown) (Equation Y-15).

(35) Quantity of asphalt blown (million barrels/year (MMbbl/year)) (Equation Y-16a).

(36) Carbon emission factor from asphalt blowing from facility-specific test data (metric 

tons C/MMbbl asphalt blown) (Equation Y-16a).

(37) Quantity of asphalt blown for each asphalt blowing unit (million barrels per year 

(MMbbl/year)) (Equation Y-16b).

(38) Emission factor for CO2 from uncontrolled asphalt blowing from facility-specific 

test data for each asphalt blowing unit (metric tons CO2/MMbbl asphalt blown) (Equation Y16b).

(39) Carbon emission factor from asphalt blowing from facility-specific test data for each 

asphalt blowing unit (metric tons C/MMbbl asphalt blown) (Equation Y-16b).

(40) Emission factor for CH4 from uncontrolled asphalt blowing from facility-specific 

test data for each asphalt blowing unit (metric tons CH4/MMbbl asphalt blown) (Equation Y-17).
Page 174 of 186

(41) Cumulative number of vessel openings for all delayed coking unit vessels of the 

same dimensions during the year (Equation Y-18).

(42) Height of coking unit vessel for each set of coke drums or vessels of the same size 

(feet) (Equation Y-18).

(43) Gauge pressure of the coking vessel when opened to the atmosphere prior to coke 

cutting or, if the alternative method provided in § 98.253(i)(2) is used, gauge pressure of the 

coking vessel when depressurization gases are first routed to the atmosphere for each set of coke 

drums or vessels of the same size (pounds per square inch gauge (psig)) (Equation Y-18).

(44) Volumetric void fraction of coking vessel prior to steaming for each set of coke 

drums or vessels of the same size (cf gas/cf of vessel) (Equation Y-18).

(45) Diameter of coking unit vessel for each set of coke drums or vessels of the same size 

(feet) (Equation Y-18).

(46) Molar volume conversion factor for each set of coke drums or vessels of the same 

size (scf per kg-mole) (Equation Y-18).

(47) Average volumetric flow rate of process gas during the event from measurement 

data, process knowledge, or engineering estimates for each set of coke drums or vessels of the 

same size (scf per hour) (Equation Y-19).

(48) Mole fraction of methane in process vent during the event from measurement data, 

process knowledge, or engineering estimates for each set of coke drums or vessels of the same 

size (kg-mole CH4/kg-mole gas) (Equation Y-19).

(49) Venting time for the event for each set of coke drums or vessels of the same size 

(hours) (Equation Y-19).
Page 175 of 186

(50) Molar volume conversion factor for each set of coke drums or vessels of the same 

size (scf per kg-mole) (Equation Y-19).

(51) Quantity of crude oil plus the quantity of intermediate products received from off 

site that are processed at the facility (MMbbl/year) (Equation Y-20).

(52) Molar volume conversion factor (scf per kg-mole) (Equation Y-20).

(53) Methane emission factor for uncontrolled blown systems (scf CH4/MMbbl ) 

(Equation Y-20).

(54) Quantity of crude oil plus the quantity of intermediate products received from off 

site that are processed at the facility (MMbbl/year) (Equation Y-22).

(55) Quantity of unstabilized crude oil received at the facility (MMbbl/year) (Equation Y23).

(56) Pressure differential from the previous storage pressure to atmospheric pressure (psi) 

(Equation Y-23).

(57) Average mole fraction of CH4 in vent gas from the unstabilized crude oil storage 

tanks from facility measurements (kg-mole CH4/kg-mole gas) (Equation Y-23).

(58) Molar volume conversion factor (scf per kg-mole ) (Equation Y-23).

(59) Specify whether the calculated or default loading factor L specified in § 98.253(n) is 

entered, for each liquid loaded to each(methods specified in § 98.253(n)).

(60) Saturation factor specified in § 98.253(n), for each liquid loaded to each vessel

(methods specified in § 98.253(n)).

(61) True vapor pressure of liquid loaded, for each liquid loaded to each vessel (psia) 

(methods specified in § 98.253(n)).
Page 176 of 186

(62) Molecular weight of vapors (lb per lb-mole), for each liquid loaded to each vessel

(methods specified in § 98.253(n)).

(63) Temperature of bulk liquid loaded, for each liquid loaded to each vessel (°R, degrees 

Rankine) (methods specified in § 98.253(n)).

(64) Total loading loss (without efficiency correction), for each liquid loaded to each 

vessel (pounds per 1000 gallons loaded) (methods specified in § 98.253(n)).

(65) Overall emission control system reduction efficiency, including the vapor collection 

system efficiency and the vapor recovery or destruction efficiency (enter zero if no emission

controls), for each liquid loaded to each vessel (percent) (methods specified § 98.253(n)).

(66) Vapor phase concentration of methane in liquid loaded, for each liquid loaded to 

each vessel (percent by volume) (methods specified in § 98.253(n)).

(67) Quantity of material loaded, for each liquid loaded to each vessel (thousand gallon 

per year) (methods specified in § 98.253(n)).

Subpart Z—PHOSPHORIC ACID PRODUCTION

39. Section 98.266 is amended by removing and reserving paragraphs (f)(5) and 

(f)(6).

40. Section 98.267 is amended by revising the introductory text and adding paragraph 

(d) to read as follows:

§ 98.267 Records that must be retained.

In addition to the records required by § 98.3(g), you must retain the records specified in 

paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section for each wet-process phosphoric acid production 

facility.

* * * * *
Page 177 of 186

(d) Verification software records. You must keep a record of the file generated by the 

verification software specified in § 98.5(b) for the applicable data specified in paragraphs (d)(1) 

through (d)(4) of this section. Retention of this file satisfies the recordkeeping requirement for 

the data in paragraphs (d)(1) through (d)(4) of this section.

(1) Inorganic carbon content of a grab sample batch of phosphate rock by origin obtained 

during month by wet-process phosphoric acid process line, from the carbon analysis results 

(percent by weight, expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation Z-1a).

(2) Mass of phosphate rock by origin consumed in month by wet-process phosphoric acid 

process line (tons) (Equation Z-1a).

(3) Carbon dioxide content of a grab sample batch of phosphate rock by origin obtained 

during month by wet-process phosphoric acid process line (percent by weight, expressed as a 

decimal fraction) (Equation Z-1b).

(4) Mass of phosphate rock by origin consumed in month by wet-process phosphoric acid 

process line (tons) (Equation Z-1b).

Subpart AA—PULP AND PAPER MANUFACTURING

41. Section 98.276 is amended by:

a. Revising the introductory paragraph;

b. Removing and reserving paragraph (b);

c. Revising paragraph (c);

d. Removing and reserving paragraphs (d), (f), (g), (h) and (i); and

e. Adding paragraph (l).

The revisions and addition read as follows:

§ 98.276 Data reporting requirements.
Page 178 of 186

In addition to the information required by § 98.3(c) and the applicable information 

required by § 98.36, each annual report must contain the information in paragraphs (a) through 

(l) of this section as applicable:

* * * * *

(c) Basis for determining the annual mass of the spent liquor solids combusted (whether 

based on T650 om-05 Solids Content of Black Liquor, TAPPI (incorporated by reference, see § 

98.7) or an online measurement system).

* * * * * 

(l) For each pulp mill lime kiln, report the information specified in paragraphs (l)(1) and 

(2) of this section.

(1) The quantity of calcium oxide (CaO) produced (metric tons).

(2) The percent of annual heat input, individually for each fossil fuel type.

42. Section 98.277 is amended by revising the introductory text and adding paragraph 

(g) to read as follows:

§ 98.277 Records that must be retained.

In addition to the information required by § 98.3(g), you must retain the records in 

paragraphs (a) through (g) of this section.

* * * * *

(g) Verification software records. You must keep a record of the file generated by the 

verification software specified in § 98.5(b) for the applicable data specified in paragraphs (g)(1) 

through (g)(27) of this section. Retention of this file satisfies the recordkeeping requirement for 

the data in paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(27) of this section.

(1) Mass of the solid fuel combusted (tons/year) (Equation C-1).
Page 179 of 186

(2) Volume of the liquid fuel combusted (gallons/year) (Equation C-1).

(3) Volume of the gaseous fuel combusted (scf/year) (Equation C-1).

(4) Annual natural gas usage (therms/year) (Equation C-1a).

(5) Annual natural gas usage (mmBtu/year) (Equation C-1b).

(6) Mass of the solid fuel combusted (tons/year) (Equation C-2a).

(7) Volume of the liquid fuel combusted (gallons/year) (Equation C-2a).

(8) Volume of the gaseous fuel combusted (scf/year) (Equation C-2a).

(9) Annual mass of the solid fuel combusted (short tons/year) (Equation C-3).

(10) Annual average carbon content of the solid fuel (percent by weight, expressed as a 

decimal fraction) (Equation C-3).

(11) Annual volume of the liquid fuel combusted (gallons/year) (Equation C-4).

(12) Annual average carbon content of the liquid fuel (kg C per gallon of fuel) (Equation 

C-4).

(13) Annual volume of the gaseous fuel combusted (scf/year) (Equation C-5).

(14) Annual average carbon content of the gaseous fuel (kg C per kg of fuel) (Equation 

C-5).

(15) Annual average molecular weight of the gaseous fuel (kg/kg-mole) (Equation C-5).

(16) Molar volume conversion factor at standard conditions, as defined in § 98.6 (scf per 

kg-mole) (Equation C-5).

(17) Identify if you will use the default high heat value from Table C-1, or actual HHV 

data (Equation C-8).

(18) High heat value of the fuel (mmBTU/tons) (Equation C-8).

(19) High heat value of the fuel (mmBTU/gallons) (Equation C-8).
Page 180 of 186

(20) High heat value of the fuel (mmBTU/scf) (Equation C-8).

(21) Mass of spent liquor solids combusted from each chemical recovery furnace located 

at a kraft or soda facility, in short tons in year, determined according to § 98.274(b) (tons/year) 

(Equation AA-1).

(22) Annual high heat value of the spent liquor solids from each chemical recovery 

furnace located at a kraft or soda facility determined according to § 98.274(b) (mmBtu per 

kilogram) (Equation AA-1).

(23) Annual high heat value of the spent liquor solids from each chemical recovery 

combustion unit located at a sulfite or stand-alone semichemical facility, determined according 

to § 98.274(b) (mmBtu per kilogram) (Equation AA-1).

(24) Mass of the spent liquor solids combusted in short tons per year determined 

according to § 98.274(b) (tons/year) (Equation AA-2).

(25) Annual carbon content of the spent liquor solids, determined according to § 

98.274(b) (percent by weight, expressed as a decimal fraction (e.g., 95% = 0.95)) (Equation AA2).

(26) Make-up quantity of CaCO3 used for the reporting year (metric tons/year) (Equation 

AA-3).

(27) Make-up quantity of Na2CO3 used for the reporting year metric tons/year) (Equation 

AA-3).

Subpart BB—SILICON CARBIDE PRODUCTION

43. Section 98.286 is amended by removing and reserving paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(4), 

and (b)(6).
Page 181 of 186

44. Section 98.287 is amended by revising the introductory text and adding paragraph 

(c) to read as follows:

§ 98.287 Records that must be retained.

In addition to the records required by § 98.3(g), you must retain the records specified in 

paragraphs (a) through (c) of this section for each silicon carbide production facility.

* * * * *

(c) Verification software records. You must keep a record of the file generated by the 

verification software specified in § 98.5(b) for the applicable data specified in paragraphs (c)(1) 

and (c)(2) of this section. Retention of this file satisfies the recordkeeping requirement for the 

data in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this section.

(1) Carbon content factor for petroleum coke consumed in month from the supplier or as 

measured by the applicable method (percent by weight expressed as a decimal fraction) 

(Equation BB-1).

(2) Petroleum coke consumption in month (tons) (Equation BB-2).

Subpart CC—SODA ASH MANUFACTURING

45. Section 98.296 is amended by removing and reserving paragraphs (b)(5) through 

(b)(7) and adding paragraphs (b)(10)(v) and (b)(10)(vi) to read as follows:

§ 98.296 Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(10) * * *

(v) Average process vent flow from mine water stripper/evaporator during performance 

test (pounds/hour). 
Page 182 of 186

(vi) Annual process vent flow rate from mine water stripper/evaporator (thousand 

pounds/hour).

* * * * *

46. Section 98.297 is amended by revising the introductory text and adding paragraph 

(c) to read as follows:

§ 98.297 Records that must be retained.

In addition to the records required by § 98.3(g), you must retain the records specified in 

paragraphs (a) through (c) of this section for each soda ash manufacturing line.

* * * * *

(c) Verification software records. You must keep a record of the file generated by the 

verification software specified in § 98.5(b) for the applicable data specified in paragraphs (c)(1) 

through (c)(4) of this section. Retention of this file satisfies the recordkeeping requirement for 

the data in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4) of this section

(1) Inorganic carbon content in trona input, from the carbon analysis results for month 

(percent by weight, expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation CC-1).

(2) Mass of trona input in month (tons) (Equation CC-1).

(3) Inorganic carbon content in soda ash output, from the carbon analysis results for 

month (percent by weight, expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation CC-2).

(4) Mass of soda ash output in month (tons) (Equation CC-2).

Subpart EE—TITANIUM DIOXIDE PRODUCTION

47. Section 98.316 is amended by removing and reserving paragraphs (b)(6) and 

(b)(9).
Page 183 of 186

48. Section 98.317 is amended by revising the introductory text and adding paragraph 

(c) to read as follows:

§ 98.317 Records that must be retained.

In addition to the records required by § 98.3(g), you must retain the records specified in 

paragraphs (a) through (c) of this section for each titanium dioxide production facility.

* * * * *

(c) Verification software records. You must keep a record of the file generated by the 

verification software specified in § 98.5(b) for the applicable data specified in paragraphs (c)(1) 

and (c)(2) of this section. Retention of this file satisfies the recordkeeping requirement for the 

data in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this section.

(1) Carbon content factor for petroleum coke consumed in month from the supplier or as 

measured by the applicable method incorporated by reference in § 98.7 according to § 98.314(c) 

(percent by weight, expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation EE-2).

(2) Calcined petroleum coke consumption for process line in month (tons) (Equation EE2).

Subpart GG—ZINC PRODUCTION

49. Section 98.336 is amended by removing and reserving paragraphs (b)(6), (b)(7), 

and (b)(10).

50. Section 98.337 is amended by revising the introductory text and adding paragraph 

(c) to read as follows:

§ 98.337 Records that must be retained.

In addition to the records required by § 98.3(g), you must retain the records specified in 

paragraphs (a) through (c) of this section for each zinc production facility.
Page 184 of 186

* * * * *

(c) Verification software records. You must keep a record of the file generated by the 

verification software specified in § 98.5(b) for the applicable data specified in paragraphs (c)(1) 

through (c)(9) of this section. Retention of this file satisfies the recordkeeping requirement for 

the data in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(9) of this section.

(1) Annual mass of zinc bearing material charged to kiln or furnace (tons) (Equation GG1).

(2) Carbon content of the zinc bearing material, from the annual carbon analysis for kiln 

or furnace (percent by weight, expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation GG-1).

(3) Annual mass of flux materials (e.g., limestone, dolomite) charged to each kiln or 

furnace (tons) (Equation GG-1).

(4) Carbon content of the flux materials charged to each kiln or furnace, from the annual 

carbon analysis (percent by weight, expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation GG-1).

(5) Annual mass of carbon electrode consumed in each furnace (tons) (Equation GG-1).

(6) Carbon content of the carbon electrode consumed in each furnace, from the annual 

carbon analysis (percent by weight, expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation GG-1).

(7) Annual mass of carbonaceous materials (e.g., coal, coke) charged to each kiln or 

furnace (tons) (Equation GG-1).

(8) Carbon content of the carbonaceous materials charged to each kiln or furnace, from 

the annual carbon analysis (percent by weight, expressed as a decimal fraction) (Equation GG-1).

(9) Identify whether each unit is a Waelz kiln or an electrothermic furnace.

Subpart TT—INDUSTRIAL WASTE LANDFILLS

51. Section 98.466 is amended by:
Page 185 of 186

a. Removing and reserving paragraph (c)(3)(i);

b. Revising paragraph (c)(3)(ii); and

c. Removing and reserving paragraph (c)(3)(iii).

The revisions read as follows:

§ 98.466 Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(3) * * *

(ii) The year of the data used in Equation TT-2 for the waste disposal quantity and 

production quantity, for each year used in Equation TT–2 of this subpart to calculate the average 

waste disposal factor (WDF).

* * * * *

52. Section 98.467 is amended to read as follows:

§ 98.467 Records that must be retained.

In addition to the information required by § 98.3(g), you must retain:

(a) The calibration records for all monitoring equipment, including the method or 

manufacturer's specification used for calibration, and all measurement data used for the purposes 

of paragraphs § 98.460(c)(2)(xii) or (xiii) or used to determine waste stream-specific DOCX 

values for use in Equation TT-1 of this subpart.

(b) Verification software records. You must keep a record of the file generated by the 

verification software specified in § 98.5(b) for the applicable data specified in paragraphs (b)(1) 

and (b)(2) of this section. Retention of this file satisfies the recordkeeping requirement for the 

data in paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this section.
Page 186 of 186

(1) Quantity of each product produced or feedstock entering the process or facility per 

waste stream per year, from measurement data and/or other company records. You must use the 

same basis for all years in the calculation (i.e., based on production or based on quantity of 

feedstock) (metric tons) (Equation TT-2).

(2) [Reserved]