1

MEMORANDUM

Date: December 17, 2012

From: Lisa Grogan-McCulloch, US EPA

Subject: Summary of Evaluation of Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) Part 98 “Inputs to 

Emission Equations” Data Elements Deferred Until 2013

To provide time to fully evaluate the potential impact from the possible release of Part 98 

data that are identified as inputs to equations, EPA deferred the deadline for reporting inputs to 

emissions equations until March 2013 for some data elements and March 2015 for others (76 FR 

53057, August 25, 2011, and 77 FR 48072, August 13, 2012). The purpose of this memorandum 

is to document EPA’s evaluation of inputs to equations whose reporting deadline was deferred 

until March 2013 (hereinafter referred to as 2013 inputs). 

In the final deferral rule (76 FR 53057) and the accompanying memorandum entitled 

“Process for Evaluating and Potentially Amending Part 98 Inputs to Emission Equations” 

(Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0929), EPA described a four-step evaluation process for the 

inputs, which are as follows): 

• Step 1: Determine whether each input is already publicly available. 

• Step 2: For inputs that are not publicly available, evaluate whether release of the 

information is likely to result in substantial competitive harm. 

• Step 3: For inputs that are likely to cause substantial competitive harm if disclosed, 

evaluate potential alternative calculation methods. 

• Step 4: For inputs that are likely to cause substantial competitive harm if disclosed, 

evaluate potential alternative verification methods. 

In general, EPA found that the 2013 inputs were either publicly available or are not the types 

of data that would allow competitors to gain a competitive advantage if publicly released. As a 

result, EPA did not need to proceed to Steps 3 and 4 above. The details of the analysis, by 

subpart, are found in the following seven attachments: 

• Attachment 1 - Subpart C – General Stationary Fuel Combustion1

• Attachment 2 - Subpart DD – Electrical Transmission and Distribution Equipment

• Attachment 3 - Subpart FF – Underground Coal Mines

• Attachment 4 - Subpart HH – Municipal Solid Waste Landfills

• Attachment 5 - Subpart II – Industrial Wastewater Treatment

• Attachment 6 - Subpart SS – Electrical Equipment Manufacture or Refurbishment

• Attachment 7 - Subpart TT – Industrial Waste Landfills

Each attachment listed above includes: 1) A summary of whether any of the data elements are 

already publicly available in federal databases or facility permits; 2) A table documenting 

 1 Subpart D, Electricity Generation, requires reporting of some of the subpart C reporting requirements deferred 

until 2013. 
2

whether there were public comments claiming that the data elements were confidential or that 

release of the data elements would cause harm to the facility; and 3) A table listing the data 

elements deferred until 2013 and the assessment related to Step 2 for each of the data elements. 

Consistent with Step 2 of the evaluation process, EPA also conducted a quantitative 

market structure analysis for the subparts with facilities located at manufacturing industries

(summarized in Attachment 8).

2 Market structure affects firms’ ability to use information about 

other firms in their market. Market structure is defined in terms of the number of firms 

supplying a commodity in the market, and the degree of control that individual firms have over 

the price they obtain for their product. For firms to be able to use information to gain a 

competitive advantage, the number of firms in the market must be small enough that firms can 

identify their competitors, and identify critical information about their competitors’ operations. 

Markets with a relatively small number of firms are termed "concentrated." 

While the level of concentration is an indicator of the potential for harm, the types of data 

elements whose release would provide the opportunity for some firms to gain a competitive 

advantage over others must still be identified. As a result, if the market structure analysis 

indicated a concentrated market, the specific data elements deferred until 2013 were then 

assessed (as described in Attachments 1-7). Note that some industries identified in Attachment 8 

may be “unconcentrated” at the national level, but still have regional concentration that could 

affect whether a data element’s release could result in harm. In some cases, this did not affect 

the analysis of the 2013 inputs, but EPA recognizes that it may be a factor that will need to be 

considered for the market structure analysis of 2015 inputs.

 2 A quantitative market structure analysis was not conducted for subparts DD and HH because these are not 

manufacturing sectors and the quantitative concentration analysis would not be applicable to them. For these 

sectors EPA did undertake a qualitative market structure analysis, as described in Attachments 2 and 4.
3

ATTACHMENT 1 -- SUBPART C 

(GENERAL STATIONARY FUEL COMBUSTION SOURCES) 

SUMMARY OF INFORMATION 

1. General Summary of EPA’s Evaluation under Steps 1 and 2 

Subpart C applies to general stationary fuel combustion. Many of the facilities reporting under 

subpart C are industrial facilities that manufacture products. Industry sectors reporting under 

subpart C include petroleum refining, chemicals, pulp and paper, metals, and mineral products 

(e.g., glass, cement). Because there are many different sectors within subpart C, many of the 

sectors may demonstrate at least moderate concentration either nationally, or in regional or 

product-specific markets, and may allow firms to identify their competitors. As a result, EPA 

could not conclude that markets would not be concentrated for some subpart C reporters, and 

further evaluated the individual data elements that were deferred until 2013.

The deadline for reporting nine “Inputs to Emission Equations” data elements from subpart C 

was deferred until 2013.3

 Attachment 1 Table C-1 lists the inputs for which reporting was 

deferred until 2013. Three of the nine data elements are reported only for units that are subject to 

40 CFR Part 75 (the Acid Rain Program) and provide the total heat input from each type of 

fuel combusted during the reporting year. The total annual heat inputs are reported under Part 75 

and made available to the public through the EPA’s acid rain website.

Of the remaining six data elements, one data element is the molar volume constant at standard 

conditions used to convert volume to mass in equation C-5. Reporters select from one of two 

constants provided in the rule based on whether they use 60 deg. F or 68 deg. F as the standard 

temperature at which volume measurements are recorded. Therefore, the only information that 

can be inferred from the molar volume constant are the standard conditions used by the 

measuring devices. These constants are industry standards that are specified in the Reporting 

Rule and thus already publicly available. They are specific to the measuring device used and do 

not reveal any proprietary information, such as the type and amount of fuel used, production 

methods, and costs. Two data elements disclose the amount and molecular weight of sorbent 

used in acid gas control devices installed on combustion units. A related data element is the 

ratio of moles of CO2 released per mole of the acid gas species removed (a default factor of 1 

is used where the sorbent is CaCaO3 and the acid gas is SO2). These data elements do not 

disclose any information considered proprietary such as production capacity, production 

volumes, or methods of production. For facilities subject to the Acid Rain Program, the type of 

sorbent used for acid gas control is published on the Acid Rain Program’s website. The 

remaining two data elements whose reporting deadline was deferred until 2013 require reporting 

of the results of quarterly analyses of the biogenic portion of wastes and/or fuels by MSW

combustion facilities and facilities that co-fire biogenic fuels and non-biogenic fuels. These data 

elements provide only the biogenic fraction of the fuels burned by the facility and do not identify 

the type, composition or amount of waste or other fuels burned. Nor do they disclose 

information that may be considered proprietary, such as information that could be used to 

estimate cost structure or operating efficiency of the MSW combustion, co-fired combustion 

units, and production processes at the facility. 

 3 Reporting of the remaining inputs in this subpart was deferred until 2015; inputs that were deferred until 

2015 are not discussed in this memorandum.
4

Although The Fertilizer Institute (TFI) (see EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0964-0011.1) and the Council 

of Industrial Boiler Owners (CIBO) (see EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0964-0014.1) submitted 

comments on the proposed deferral notice (75 FR 81350, December 27, 2012) and the Call for 

information (75 FR 81366, December 27, 2012), their comments consisted of very general 

claims that all subpart C data elements are proprietary. None of their arguments were specific to 

the nine 2013 data elements. Most of their comments focused on industrial production facilities 

and expressed concern that the type and quantities of fuel burned at a facility reveal information 

on production costs. TFI asserted that the quantity and types of fuels consumed by a facility 

would cause harm if released because that information can be combined with other data reported 

under subpart G to provide knowledge about cost structure. TFI stated that the fuel costs are a 

significant portion of the overall production costs for ammonia manufacturers and that knowing 

the type and quantities of fuels consumed at a facility would give competitors valuable insight 

into production costs and pricing structures. However, TFI did not explain how disclosure of the 

2013 data elements would lead competitors to proprietary cost data. None of the 2013 data 

elements reveal the type or quantity of fuels consumed or any information regarding fuel costs or 

any other insight into production costs and profit margins. CIBO expressed concern that 

identifying facilities that use “non-traditional fuel” could put companies at a competitive 

disadvantage and recommended that the type, composition of biomass combusted, molecular 

weights, carbon content, and high heating values should not be disclosed because this 

information could be used to calculate cost of production. However, none of the 2013 data 

elements provide information on the type, composition, molecular weight, carbon content or 

higher heating values of fuels combusted. 

Based on the analysis above, we did not proceed to Steps 3 and 4 of the assessment, evaluation of 

potential alternative calculation and verification methods.

2. Summary of Public Availability of Subpart C Deferred Data Elements

Three of the data elements deferred until 2013 are reported by facilities subject to the Acid Rain 

Program and are made available to the public through the U.S. EPA’s Acid Rain Program 

website (see http://ampd.epa.gov/ampd/):

• §98.36(d)(1)(iv) - For stationary combustion units that are subject to subpart D: The total 

heat input from each fuel listed in Table C-2 of subpart C combusted during the year 

(except as otherwise provided in 98.33(c)(4)(ii)(B)), expressed in mmBtu.

• §98.36(d)(2)(ii)(G) - For subpart D units that use the alternative methods specified in 

§98.33(a)(5)(i) and (ii) to monitor and report heat input data year-round according to 

appendix D to Part 75 or §75.19: Report annual heat input from each type of fuel listed in 

Table C-2 of subpart C combusted during the reporting year, expressed in mmBtu.

• §98.36(d)(2)(iii)(G) - For subpart D units with CEMS that use the alternative methods 

specified in §98.33(a)(5)(iii) to monitor and report heat input data year-round according 

Part 75: Report annual heat input from each type of fuel listed in Table C-2 of subpart C 

combusted during the reporting year, expressed in mmBtu.
5

The Acid Rain Program also publishes information on the type of acid gas control used on their 

website. The data on the website includes the type sorbent used for acid gas control (e.g., wet 

limestone, fluidized bed limestone injection, dry lime flue gas desulfurization (FGD)). This is 

less specific than deferred data element §98.36(e)(2)(viii)(B) (molecular weight of sorbent); 

however, the molecular weight of the sorbent can be determined if the type of sorbent is known.

These data are available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/boiler/boilerpg.html under the “Technical 

Information” section. Download the databases zip file and open the database named: "Emissions 

Database for Boilers and Process Heaters Containing Stack Test, CEM, & Fuel Analysis Data 

Reported under ICR No. 2286.01 & ICR No. 2286.03 (version 7).accdb". The table named 

"Major Source Data: 30day Control" contains the control parameter monitoring data including 

fields for "ControlDevice" and "SorbentInjRate" and other notes about the injection systems.

We have found no public source for the remaining 2013 subpart C data elements. These data 

elements are very specific to the GHG Reporting Program and are not likely to be available for a 

significant number of combustion sources in EPA or other publicly available databases. 

3. Summary of Public Comments on CBI and Data Deferral Actions

Table C-1. Summary of Public Comments on CBI and Data Deferral

Federal Register Notice Summary of Comments

July 7, 2010 Part 98 

Confidentiality 

Determination Proposal 

(75 FR 39094)

Although many commenters suggested that disclosure of subpart C 

inputs to emission equations could cause harm, none mentioned specific

2013 data elements. Commenters that identified specific subpart C data 

elements, claimed that the type and quantity of fuel burned were 

proprietary since they provide insight into production costs. However, 

none of the 2013 subpart C elements provide information on the types 

or quantities of fuels combusted.

December 27, 2010 

Proposed Deferral (75 FR 

81350) and Call for 

Information (75 FR 81366)

Two commenters (The Fertilizer Institute (TFI) (EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0964-

0011.1) and the Council of Industrial Boiler Owners (CIBO) (EPA-HQOAR-2010-0964-0014.1) submitted general comments claiming that all 

subpart C data elements are proprietary. However, none of their 

arguments were specific to the 2013 data elements. Their comments 

focus on industrial production facilities and express concern that the 

type and quantities of fuel burned at a facility reveals information on 

production costs. TFI argued that subpart C data would cause harm if 

released because they can be combined with data reported under 

subpart G to provide information about cost structure; however, they 

did not discuss how the 2013 data elements could provide proprietary 

cost structure data. CIBO expressed concern that identifying facilities 

that use “non-traditional fuel” could put companies at a competitive 

disadvantage and recommended that the type, composition of biomass 

combusted, molecular weights, carbon content, and high heating values 

should not be disclosed because this information could be used to 

calculate cost of production. Comments from state agencies 

(Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Maine) stated that subpart C inputs 

should be made public and noted that data for utilities are already 
6

publicly available. Some states also stated that some data collected by 

their own GHG reporting programs are already made public; however, 

the data elements identified by these commenters are not the same as 

the 2013 data elements. The Iowa Department of Natural Resources 

(EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0929-0014.1) that many of the data elements 

reported by facilities subject to the Acid Rain Program are public and 

specifically identified 98.36(d)(1)(iv) as an example. The Sierra Club 

(EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0964-0029.1) identified the data elements reported 

under subpart D (utilities) and the biomass composition data reported 

under §98.36(e)(2)(x)(A) and §98.36(e)(2)(xi) as data that are already 

public. They also stated that data elements §98.36(e)(2)(viii)(A) through 

(C) (related to sorbent usage) would not likely cause harm if released.

4. Evaluation of Individual 2013 Inputs

Table C-2. Evaluation of Individual Subpart C (Stationary Combustion Units) 2013 Inputs 

Citation Data Element Assessment by Data Element

98.36d1iv For stationary combustion units that are subject to 

subpart D: The total heat input from each fuel 

listed in Table C-2 of subpart C combusted during 

the year (except as otherwise provided in 

98.33(c)(4)(ii)(B)), expressed in mmBtu

These data elements are reported only for 

units that are subject to 40 CFR Part 75 (the 

Acid Rain Program). The total annual heat 

inputs are already reported under Part 75 

and made available to the public through the 

EPA’s acid rain website 

(http://ampd.epa.gov/ampd/). 

98.36d2iiG For subpart D units that use the alternative 

methods specified in §98.33(a)(5)(i) and (ii) to 

monitor and report heat input data year-round 

according to appendix D to Part 75 or §75.19: 

Report annual heat input from each type of fuel 

listed in Table C-2 of subpart C combusted during 

the reporting year, expressed in mmBtu

98.36d2iiiG For subpart D units with CEMS that use the 

alternative methods specified in §98.33(a)(5)(iii) to 

monitor and report heat input data year-round 

according Part 75: Report annual heat input from 

each type of fuel listed in Table C-2 of subpart C 

combusted during the reporting year, expressed in 

mmBtu.

98.36e2ivG The value of the molar volume constant (MVC) at 

standard conditions used in Eq. C-5

The value of the conversion factor is 

specified in the rule. Reporters select from 

two values provided in the rule based on the 

temperature used to record fuel 

measurements. The information does not 

reveal the amount or type of fuel combusted 

or provide any insight into production 

methods, capacity, or costs. 

98.36e2viiiA The amount of sorbent used in acid gas control 

devices during the reporting year.

Because this information does not disclose 

any proprietary information regarding 

production capacity, production volumes, 

methods of production, or any other 

information about a production facility.

98.36e2viiiB The molecular weight of the sorbent.

98.36e2viiiC The ratio (“R”) in Equation C-11. This is the ratio of 

moles of CO2 released per mole of the acid gas 

species removed (a default factor of 1 is used 
7

Citation Data Element Assessment by Data Element

where the sorbent is CaCaO3 and the acid gas is 

SO2)

98.36e2xA When ASTM methods D7459-08 (incorporated by 

reference, see 98.7) and D6866-08 (incorporated 

by reference, see 98.7) are used to determine the 

biogenic portion of the annual CO2 emissions from 

MSW combustion, as described in 98.34(d), report 

the results of each quarterly sample analysis

This information provides only the biogenic 

fraction of the fuels burned by the facility. 

This information does not provide any 

insight into proprietary information, such as 

the type and amount of fuels combusted, 

production costs, or operating efficiency of 

the MSW combustion or co-fired combustion 

units or insights into any production 

processes at the facility. 

98.36e2xi When ASTM methods D7459-08 (incorporated by 

reference, see 98.7) and D6866-08 (incorporated 

by reference, see 98.7) are used in accordance 

with 98.34(e) to determine the biogenic portion of 

the annual CO2 emissions from a unit that co-fires 

biogenic fuels (or partly-biogenic fuels, including 

tires if you are electing to report biogenic CO2 

emissions from tire combustion) and non-biogenic 

fuels: Report the results of quarterly sample 

analysis
8

ATTACHMENT 2 -- SUBPART DD 

(ELECTRICAL TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM USE) 

SUMMARY OF INFORMATION 

1. General Summary of EPA’s Evaluation under Steps 1 and 2 

This subpart applies to electric transmission and distribution systems and requires reporting of 

emissions from SF6- and PFC-containing equipment. Facilities reporting under this subpart 

consist of public utilities, including electric cooperatives, public supply corporations (e.g., 

Tennessee Valley Authority), Federal agencies (e.g., Bonneville Power Administration), and 

municipally owned electric utilities. The qualitative assessment of the market structure 

determined that these facilities are public or publicly-regulated utilities and are not likely to be 

affected by competitive market conditions that may apply to other industries.4 Nonetheless, EPA 

assessed the individual data elements.

Reporting of all 11 “Inputs to Emission Equations” data elements in Subpart DD was deferred 

until 2013. Attachment 2 lists the deferred input data elements. The 2013 inputs relate to 

maintenance activities and installation of new/replacement of existing gas-insulated equipment 

(e.g., circuit breakers, switchgear, power transformers, etc) and amounts of SF6 and PFC used or 

recovered in servicing or replacing such equipment. These data elements do not disclose 

information considered proprietary for this sector, such as specific information about 

manufacturing processes, operating conditions, operating costs, or price structures. 

There were no comments in response to the initial CBI proposal (75 FR 39094, July 7, 2010), 

proposed deferral notice (75 FR 81350, December 27, 2012), and associated Call for Information 

(75 FR 81366, December 27, 2012) indicating that release of subpart DD inputs to emission 

equations would cause harm. 

Based on the above analysis for this subpart, EPA did not proceed to Steps 3 and 4 of the 

assessment, evaluation of potential alternative calculation or verification methods.

2. Summary of Public Availability of Subpart DD Deferred Data Elements

The specific deferred data elements in subpart DD were not found to be available in EPA 

databases or facility permits. The 2013 subpart DD data elements are obscure data that are 

unlikely to be available in other published data sources.

3. Summary of Public Comments on CBI and Data Deferral Actions

Table DD-1. Summary of Public Comments on CBI and Data Deferral

Federal Register Notice Summary of Comments

July 7, 2010 Part 98 

Confidentiality 

There were no public comments claiming that release of subpart DD 

inputs to emission equations would cause harm. 

 4 A quantitative market concentration analysis was not done for this subpart because of the unique market 

structure of the source category and because concentration data are only available for manufacturing sector NAICS 

codes.
9

Federal Register Notice Summary of Comments

Determination Proposal 

(75 FR 39094)

December 27, 2010 

Proposed Deferral (75 FR 

81350) and Call for 

Information (75 FR 81366)

There were no public comments claiming that release of subpart DD 

inputs to emission equations would cause harm in response to the 

proposed Deferral notice and associated Call for Information.

4. Evaluation of Individual 2013 Inputs

Table DD-2. Evaluation of Individual Subpart DD (Electrical Transmission and 

Distribution System Use) 2013 Inputs

Citation Data Element Assessment by Data Element

98.306a2 New during the year (all SF6-insulated equipment, 

including hermetically sealed-pressure switchgear).

Facilities reporting under this subpart consist 

of public utilities, including electric 

cooperatives, public supply corporations (e.g., 

Tennessee Valley Authority), Federal agencies 

(e.g., Bonneville Power Administration), and 

municipally owned electric utilities. These are 

public or publicly-regulated utilities that are 

not affected by competitive market conditions 

that may apply to other industries. The 

reported data relate to maintenance activities 

and installation of new/replacement of existing 

gas-insulated equipment (e.g., circuit breakers, 

switchgear, power transformers, etc) and 

amounts of SF6 and PFC used or recovered in 

servicing or replacing such equipment. These 

data elements do not disclose any information 

about a manufacturing process or operating 

conditions that would be proprietary. 

98.306a3 Retired during the year (all SF6-insulated 

equipment, including hermetically sealed-pressure 

switchgear).

98.306d Pounds of SF6and PFC stored in containers, but not 

in energized equipment, at the beginning of the 

year.

98.306e Pounds of SF6 and PFC stored in containers, but not 

in energized equipment, at the end of the year.

98.306f Pounds of SF6and PFC purchased in bulk from 

chemical producers or distributors.

98.306g Pounds of SF6and PFC purchased from equipment 

manufacturers or distributors with or inside 

equipment, including hermetically sealed-pressure 

switchgear.

98.306h Pounds of SF6and PFC returned to facility after offsite recycling.

98.306i Pounds of SF6and PFC in bulk and contained in 

equipment sold to other entities.

98.306j Pounds of SF6and PFC returned to suppliers.

98.306k Pounds of SF6and PFC sent off-site for recycling.

98.306l Pounds of SF6and PFC sent off-site for destruction.
10

ATTACHMENT 3 -- SUBPART FF (UNDERGROUND COAL MINES)

SUMMARY OF INFORMATION

1. General Summary of EPA’s Evaluation under Steps 1 and 2 

Subpart FF applies to active underground coal mines and to any underground coal mines under 

development that have pre-mining degasification systems. Coal mine emissions must be reported 

under subpart FF only if the mine liberates at least 36,500,000 actual cubic feet of CH4 per year. 

The market structure analysis showed that the coal industry was moderately concentrated at the 

national-level with five companies accounting for about 60% of production (see Attachment 8). 

Therefore, EPA proceeded to evaluate the individual data elements that were deferred until 2013.

Reporting of all 14 “Inputs to Emission Equations” data elements in Subpart FF was deferred 

until 2013. Twelve of these data elements were initially deferred in the August 25, 2011 final 

deferral notice. Two additional input data elements added by the Technical Corrections final rule 

(76 FR 73886) were finalized in the August 13, 2012 final CBI and deferral revisions (77 FR 

48072). Table FF-1 of Attachment 3 lists the deferred inputs. Information generally considered 

proprietary for this sector includes information about the amount or grade of coal produced, 

information about production efficiency or costs, information about the operation of the mine, 

and forward-looking information concerning anticipated future production and profit margins.. 

Eight of the data elements deferred until 2013 (§98.326(a) through (k)) are various CH4

quantities, CH4 concentrations, or flow rates from mine ventilation and degasifications 

systems. The data elements do not disclose the type of information listed above that is considered 

proprietary by this industry. The deferred data element, quarterly CH4 concentration from 

each ventilation monitoring device (§98.326(g)), does not reveal any proprietary information, 

such as the grade of coal mined, amount of coal produced, or costs of production. Release of 

§98.326(g) would not disclose actual production rates, production capacity, production 

efficiency, production costs, pricing structure, or any other information that could be used by 

competitors to develop marketing strategies that would undermine the reporter’s competitive 

position. 

Three data elements (temperature and pressure at which flow rate in ventilation and 

degasification systems was measured and moisture content of the gas (§98.326(o))) do not 

provide any significant information regarding the design or operation of the underground coal 

mine or any other information listed above that is typically considered proprietary for this sector. 

Similarly, the gaseous organic correction factor (§98.326(o)), which is required to be reported 

only if the reporter selects a particular method to measure methane concentration, would not 

reveal proprietary information on mine design and operation or other information listed above 

that is considered proprietary for the sector. 

The remaining two data elements are the assumed destruction efficiencies for control devices 

(§98.326(p)). Reporters may use either the manufacturer’s specified destruction efficiency, a 

default value of 0.99, or a default value of 1.0 if methane is sent off-site for destruction. 

Therefore, the destruction efficiency is either a default value provided in the rule or a value that 

is provided in manufacturer’s literature, both of which are publicly available.
11

There were no comments in response to the initial CBI proposal (75 FR 39094, July 7, 2010), 

proposed deferral notice (75 FR 81350, December 27, 2012), and associated Call for Information 

(75 FR 81366, December 27, 2012) indicating that release of subpart FF inputs to emission 

equations would cause harm.

Based on the above analysis for this subpart, EPA did not proceed to Steps 3 and 4 of the 

assessment, evaluation of potential alternative calculation or verification methods.

2. Summary of Public Availability of Subpart FF Deferred Data Elements

The 2013 subpart FF deferred data elements were not available in EPA databases or facility 

permits. Reports produced by EPA’s Coalbed Methane Outreach Program (CMOP) provide 

information on annual emissions for some mines, but do not provide the detailed information 

included in the deferred input data elements (e.g., quarterly or weekly concentrations and flow 

rates at individual measurement locations). The subpart FF input data elements are unlikely to be 

available in other published data sources. The following three data elements are collected by 

MSHA :

• Quarterly CH4 liberated from each ventilation monitoring point (CH4Vm)(metric tons 

CH4), §98.326(a)

• Quarterly volumetric flow rate (scfm) or each ventilation monitoring point, §98.326(f)

• Quarterly CH4 concentration from each ventilation monitoring device, §98.236(g)

MSHA does not publish this information, but indicated during a telephone call that they do not 

consider this information to be sensitive and would likely release it in response to a Freedom of 

Information Act (FOIA) request.

3. Summary of Public Comments on CBI and Data Deferral Actions

Table FF-1. Summary of Public Comments on CBI and Data Deferral

Federal Register Notice Summary of Comments

July 7, 2010 Part 98 

Confidentiality 

Determination Proposal 

(75 FR 39094)

There were no public comments claiming that release of subpart FF 

inputs to emission equations would cause harm. 

December 27, 2010 

Proposed Deferral (75 FR 

81350) and Call for 

Information (75 FR 81366)

There were no public comments claiming that release of subpart FF 

inputs to emission equations would cause harm in response to the 

proposed Deferral notice and associated Call for Information. One 

commenter on the proposed deferral notice noted that some of the 

input data (e.g., volumetric flows, CH4 concentrations, and CH4 liberated 

from ventilation and degasification systems) would be available from 

Mine Health and Safety Administration (MSHA) inspection reports.
12

4. Evaluation of Individual 2013 Inputs

Table FF-2. Evaluation of Subpart FF (Underground Coal Mines) 2013 Inputs 

Citation Data Element Assessment by Data Element

98.326a Quarterly CH4 liberated from each ventilation 

monitoring point (CH4Vm)(metric tons CH4)

Release of these data elements would not 

disclose any proprietary information, such as 

the amount or grade of coal produced, 

production efficiency, production costs, 

operating methods, or remaining coal reserves.

98.326b Weekly CH4 liberated from each degasification 

system monitoring point (metric tons CH4)

98.326c Quarterly CH4 destruction at each ventilation and 

degasification system destruction device or point of 

offsite transport (CH2Destroyed) (metric tons CH4)

98.326f Quarterly volumetric flow rate (scfm) or each 

ventilation monitoring point

98.326g Quarterly CH4 concentration from each ventilation 

monitoring device

98.326h Weekly volumetric flow used to calculate CH4 

liberated from degasification systems 

98.326j Weekly volumetric flow used to calculate CH4

destruction for each destruction device and each 

point of offsite transport (scf).

98.326k Weekly CH4 concentration (%) used to calculate CH4 

flow to each destruction device or point of offsite 

transport (C).

98.326o Temperature (deg R) at which each sample is 

collected 

98.326o Pressure (atm) at which each sample is collected

98.326o Moisture content during the measurement period. 

Added by Tech Corrections final rule (76 FR 73886) 

and added to Table A-7 as a 2013 deferred input 

(see 77 FR 48072, August 13, 2012.)

98.326o Gaseous organic concentration correction factor if 

Eq FF-9 is required. Added by Tech Corrections final 

rule (76 FR 73886) and identified as a 2013 deferred 

input in 1/10/12 CBI proposal (77 FR 1450)

Eq. FF-9 is an optional measurement method 

that allows measurement of total gaseous 

organic concentration and correction for the 

fraction that is methane (vs nonmethane 

organic compounds) instead of directly 

measuring methane. This data element does

not reveal proprietary information regarding 

the design or operation of the mine, production 

cost, or any of the other proprietary 

information identified above.

98.326p Assumed destruction efficiency for the primary 

destruction device

Reporters use either a default value specified in 

the rule or a value publicly available from the 

98.326p Assumed destruction efficiency for the backup control device manufacturer’s literature.

destruction device
13

ATTACHMENT 4 -- SUBPART HH (MSW LANDFILLS) 

SUMMARY OF INFORMATION 

1. General Summary of EPA’s Evaluation under Steps 1 and 2 

The subpart applies to open and closed MSW landfills that accepted waste during or after 1980 

and generate CH4 in amounts equivalent to 25,000 metric tons CO2e or more per year. MSW 

landfill data are widely available and not viewed as proprietary. For example, approximately 

60% of landfills are publicly owned and data such as their design capacity, area, waste 

acceptance rate, opening year, closure year (for closed landfills), and gas collection system 

information are public records found in municipal or county files and on several state agency 

websites. Private landfills typically hold long-term waste disposal contracts with municipalities 

and such information is usually made publicly available in municipal files. 

A quantitative market concentration analysis was not done for MSW landfills because it is not a 

manufacturing industry and data were not available. However, a qualitative assessment of the 

market structure determined that there is competition among regional landfills for contracts with 

cities, counties, and other customers to dispose MSW. Because there are few landfills in a 

region, EPA could not conclude that the market would not be concentrated within the region. 

Therefore, EPA proceeded to evaluate the individual data elements deferred until 2013. 

The types of data that, if available to the public, could be used by competitors to gain an 

advantage at MSW landfills are economic data such as: landfill-specific tipping fees (i.e., the 

charge levied upon a given quantity of waste received at the landfill) and other disposal fees, 

revenues, landfill construction and operating costs, and contract or client lists. Such data could 

provide competitors insights that they could use to develop pricing structures.

Reporting of all 25 “Inputs to Emission Equations” data elements in Subpart HH was deferred 

until 2013. Attachment 4 lists the deferred input data elements. None of the deferred data 

elements are economic data, nor would they reveal economic data of the types listed above. 

Rather, the deferred data are data such as the year the landfill opened and closed, the quantity of 

waste disposed in the landfill, waste composition, quantity of methane collected from the 

landfill, and other technical data used to calculate emissions. 

As evidence that MSW landfill data are widely available, four of the deferred data elements 

(specifically identified in Attachment 4 Table HH-2) are the same as data elements found in the 

EPA’s Landfill Methane Outreach Program (LMOP) database, a publicly available database. 

Over 2,400 MSW landfills are in the LMOP database, and the data are submitted voluntarily by 

public and private landfill owners and operators, landfill gas energy developers, states and other 

stakeholders. Nine of the deferred data elements (also identified in Attachment 4, Table HH-2) 

are the same as data found in Title V operating permits, many of which are used in the potential 

to emit calculation required under Title V. Several of the nine data elements are also available on 

multiple State and company web sites and in commercial landfill directories available for 

purchase. 

Two of the input data elements (last year landfill accepted waste for landfills using Eq. HH-3 

and capacity of the landfill for closed landfills using Eq. HH-3 reported under 98.346(a)) are 

the same as data elements already submitted by landfills using alternative methods for which the 
14

data are not inputs. Those data elements were finalized as non-CBI in the May 26, 2011 CBI 

determination notice, and the non-CBI determinations for these two data elements were not 

challenged. The submitted data have already been publicly released by EPA.

Another deferred data element, fraction of CH4 in landfill gas (98.346(e)), would not reveal 

any information about landfill fees, revenues, costs, or contracts. And yet another data element, 

modeled annual methane generation, can be back-calculated for landfills without gas 

collection systems from the reported annual methane emissions (which are emission data and 

therefore have already been publicly released) and the default oxidation factor, which is the same 

for all landfills and already publicly available. For landfills with gas collection systems, the 

quantity of landfill methane generated does not reveal any details about manufacturing 

processes, products, or raw materials.

There were no public comments asserting that release of any subpart HH data elements would 

cause harm in response to EPA’s July 7, 2010 proposed CBI determination notice or the 

proposed Deferral notice and associated Call for Information. 

Based on the above analysis for this subpart, EPA did not proceed to Steps 3 and 4 of the 

assessment, evaluation of potential alternative calculation or verification methods.

2. Summary of Public Availability of Subpart HH Deferred Data Elements

Table HH-1. Summary of Public Data Availability for Subpart HH

Public Data 

Source

Description of Sources 

Reviewed

Results

EPA’s LMOP 

database

Database containing 

technical data on over 

2,400 landfills and over 

570 operational landfill 

gas energy projects.

4 deferred data elements are publicly available for most 

of the over 2,400 landfills in the LMOP database:

• Year landfill started accepting waste, 98.346a

• Year landfill last accepted waste for closed landfills, 

98.346a

• Capacity of landfill for closed landfills, 98.346a

• Fraction of CH4 in landfill gas, 98.346e
15

Public Data 

Source

Description of Sources 

Reviewed

Results

Permits Over 5 Title V permits 

from Indiana and 1 from 

Nebraska

The following data elements were the same as data that 

is publicly available in permits. The level of detail in 

permits varies by state. Several of the elements listed 

below are contained in attachments to the permits that 

show “potential to emit” calculations. Some states (e.g., 

Indiana) include such attachments in the permits that are 

available on the state websites:

• Year landfill started accepting waste, 98.346a

• Year landfill last accepted waste for closed landfills, 

98.346a

• Capacity of landfill for closed landfills, 98.346a

• Waste disposal quantity for each year, 98.346a

• Landfill capacity for open landfills using Eq HH-3, 

98.346b

• Fraction of CH4 in landfill gas, 98.346e

• Decay rate (k), 98.346d2

• Destruction efficiency of primary device, 98.346i5

• Estimated gas collection efficiency, 98.246i7

Permits that contain potential to emit calculations 

include the methane generation potential (Lo) value 

which can be converted to DOC using a standard 

mathematical equation.

Other public 

data sources

Several state web sites.

“Waste Business 

Journal,” available for 

purchase. Company or 

municipal websites.

Data elements available on state websites vary by state 

from basic MSW landfill lists to technical data on 

capacity, disposal acreage, open year, closure year, 

annual waste acceptance rate, and liner status. Waste 

Business Journal contains site-specific technical data. 

Company or municipal websites can contain data on 

individual landfills and landfill gas energy projects. 
16

3. Summary of Public Comments on CBI and Data Deferral Actions

Table HH-2. Summary of Public Comments on Data Deferral

Federal Register Notice Summary of Comments

July 7, 2010 Part 98 

Confidentiality 

Determination Proposal 

(75 FR 39094)

There were no public comments claiming that any subpart HH data 

elements would cause harm if collected and released. 

December 27, 2010 

Proposed Deferral (75 FR 

81350) and Call for 

Information (75 FR 81366)

There were no public comments claiming that release of subpart HH 

inputs to emission equations would cause harm in response to the 

proposed Deferral notice and associated Call for Information.

4. Evaluation of Individual 2013 Inputs

Table HH-3. Evaluation of Subpart HH (MSW Landfills) 2013 Inputs 

Citation Data Element Assessment by Data Element

98.346a Year in which the landfill first started accepting 

waste for disposal

All three data elements are publicly available for 

most landfills in the LMOP database (see Table

HH-2). The last year landfill accepted waste and 

capacity of the landfill for closed landfills are the 

same as data elements reported by landfills using 

alternative equations that were previously 

determined to be non-CBI in the May 26, 2011 CBI 

rule (see Table HH-3). Therefore, other landfills 

have already submitted this data and EPA has 

publicly released it. The cross-cutting assessment 

described in the next row also applies to these

three data elements.

98.346a Last year the landfill accepted waste for landfills 

using Eq. HH-3

98.346a Capacity of the landfill (for closed landfills using 

Eq. HH-3)

98.346a Waste disposal quantity for each year of landfill 

required to be included when using Equation 

HH-1 of this subpart (in metric tons, wet weight)

Cross-cutting assessment for all subpart HH data 

elements: See Section 1 of this attachment for 

discussion on how these data elements differ from 

the types of data considered proprietary for this 

sector. In addition, approximately 60% of landfills 

are publicly owned and data such as their design 

capacity, area, waste acceptance rate, opening 

year, closure year, and gas collection system 

information are public records. Private landfills 

typically hold long-term waste disposal contracts 

with municipalities and such information is 

typically made publicly available by municipalities. 

Some of the deferred data elements (specifically 

identified in Attachment 4 Table HH-2) are the 

same as data elements that are publicly available 

for many landfills in EPA’s LMOP database or 

facility Title V permits. 

98.346b For years when waste quantity data are 

determined using the methods in §98.343(a)(3), 

report the quantity of waste determined using 

the methods in §98.343(a)(3)(i)

98.346b For years when waste quantity data are 

determined using the methods in §98.343(a)(3), 

report the quantity of waste determined using 

the methods in §98.343(a)(3)(ii)

98.346b For historical waste disposal quantities that 

were not determined using the methods in 

§98.343(a)(3), report the population served by 

the landfill for each year the Equation HH-2 of 

this subpart is applied

98.346b For historical waste disposal quantities that 

were not determined using the methods in 

§98.343(a)(3), report the value of landfill 

capacity (LFC) used in the calculation (For open 

landfills using Equation HH-3 of this subpart). 
17

Citation Data Element Assessment by Data Element

Note: this is actually waste in place per 

description under equation.

98.346c Waste composition for each year required for 

Equation HH-1, in percentage by weight, for 

each waste category listed Table HH-1 of this 

subpart to calculate the annual modeled CH4 

generation. 

98.346d1 Degradable organic carbon (DOC) value used These are default values specified in the Part 98 

regulatory text. Although DOC and k vary by type 

of waste, landfills can elect to use bulk waste or 

modified bulk waste options, which don’t reveal 

any unique details about landfill wastes. The 

cross-cutting assessment in the previous row also 

applies. 

98.346d1 Each waste type used to calculate CH4 

generation using Equation HH-1, report the 

methane correction factor (MCF) values used in 

the calculations

98.346d1 Each waste type used to calculate CH4 

generation using Equation HH-1, report the 

fraction of DOC dissimilated (DOCF) values used 

in the calculations

98.346d2 Decay rate (k) value

98.346e Fraction of CH4 in landfill gas (F) This data element would not reveal any 

information about landfill fees, revenues, costs, or 

contracts.

98.346f If multiple cover types are used, report surface 

area associated with each cover type 

See “Cross-cutting assessment for all subpart HH 

data elements” above.

98.346g Modeled annual methane generation rate for 

the reporting year (from Equation HH-1, used in 

Equation HH-5)

For landfills without gas collection systems, this 

data element can be back-calculated from 

reported annual CH4 emissions (which has already 

been publicly released) and default oxidation 

factor in the rule which is already publicly 

available. For landfills with gas collection systems, 

the quantity of landfill methane generated does 

not reveal any details about manufacturing 

processes, products, or raw materials.

98.346i5 Annual operating hours for the primary 

destruction device

See “Cross-cutting assessment for all subpart HH 

data elements” above.

98.346i5 Annual operating hours for the backup 

destruction device

98.346i5 Destruction efficiency for the primary 

destruction device

Data elements are either a default value specified 

in the Part 98 regulatory text or a manufacturer’s 

specified value that are typically available in 

manufacturer’s literature. Also see “Cross-cutting 

assessment for all subpart HH data elements” 

above.

98.346i5 Destruction efficiency for the backup 

destruction device

98.346i6 Annual quantity of recovered CH4 (Equation HH4)See “Cross-cutting assessment for all subpart HH 

data elements” above.

98.346i7 Surface area as specified in Table HH-3

98.346i7 Estimated gas collection system efficiency

98.346i7 Annual operating hours of the gas collection 

system (frec in Eq.- HH-7 and HH-8) 

98.346i9 CH4 generation value (input to Equation HH-6) 

Note: per instructions this is LFG generated from 

HH-1 or LFG recovered from HH-4
18

ATTACHMENT 5 -- SUBPART II (INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT)

SUMMARY OF INFORMATION

1. General Summary of EPA’s Evaluation under Steps 1 and 2 

Subpart II applies to anaerobic processes used to treat industrial wastewater and industrial 

wastewater treatment sludge from pulp and paper manufacturing, food processing, ethanol 

production and petroleum refining, if the facility meets the applicability criteria in Subpart A. 

The market structure analysis showed that about half the NAICS associated with the industries 

expected to report under subpart II are moderately concentrated at the national level (see 

Attachment 8). Therefore, EPA further evaluated the individual data elements that were deferred 

until 2013.

For these industries, the types of information that are considered proprietary or have previously 

been determined to be CBI in the May 26, 2011 final CBI determination notice include 

information on quantities and composition of raw materials used in the manufacturing processes 

and information on quantities and compositions of manufactured products. In addition, specific 

operating parameters for certain petroleum refinery manufacturing process units are considered 

proprietary because they would reveal details about a site-specific manufacturing processes, 

process efficiencies, or abilities to process certain raw materials or produce specific refinery 

products. For similar reasons, specific design and capacity data elements for manufacturing 

process units may be considered proprietary. Reporting of 11 “Inputs to Emission Equations” 

data elements in Subpart II was deferred until 2013. See attachment 5 for a listing of these data 

elements.5

Four data elements deferred until 2013 include the volume of wastewater entering anaerobic 

treatment processes and the chemical oxygen demand (COD) or biological oxygen demand 

(BOD), as well as the annual mass of CH4 generated and recovered. These volumes, oxygen 

demand, and CH4 data or the wastewater treatment process do not provide detailed insights into 

the design or operation of the facility’s manufacturing processes or their raw materials and 

products. 

Three data elements used to calculate methane generation and recovery (maximum CH4 

potential, methane conversion factor, and collection efficiency) are default values that are 

specified in the rule (by general type of treatment system design); their disclosure would not 

yield further insight into the manufacturing processes at the facility or any significant details of 

wastewater treatment system design and operation. 

Two data elements are operating hours for destruction devices. The operating hours of devices 

that destroy methane collected from wastewater treatment do not provide any information on 

operating hours or production rates of the manufacturing processes generating the wastewater. 

The remaining two data elements are assumed destruction efficiencies for control devices, 

which are either a default value (0.99) or the manufacturer’s specified destruction efficiency. 

Most U.S. manufacturers that sell devices to control biogas from wastewater treatment processes 

 5 Five other data elements were deferred until 2015; they are not discussed in this memo.
19

(e.g., flares) list the destruction efficiencies for the control devices on their web sites (examples 

are listed in attachment 5). 

There were no public comments in response to the proposed Deferral notice and associated Call 

for Information asserting that release of subpart II inputs to emission equations would cause 

harm. 

Based on the above analysis for this subpart, EPA did not proceed to Steps 3 and 4 of the 

assessment, evaluation of potential alternative calculation or verification methods.

2. Summary of Public Availability of Subpart II Deferred Data Elements

The specific deferred data elements in subpart II were not found to be elsewhere available in 

EPA databases or facility permits for petroleum refineries, pulp and paper manufacturing, 

ethanol, and food processing plants. The data elements are detailed in nature and not likely to be 

generally available in other published data sources.

3. Summary of Public Comments on CBI and Data Deferral Actions

Table II-1. Summary of Public Comments on CBI and Data Deferral

Federal Register Notice Summary of Comments

July 7, 2010 Part 98 

Confidentiality 

Determination Proposal 

(75 FR 39094)

There were no specific comments on any of the proposed subpart II CBI 

determinations.

December 27, 2010 

Proposed Deferral (75 FR 

81350) and Call for 

Information (75 FR 81366)

There were no public comments claiming that release of subpart II inputs 

to emission equations would cause harm in response to the proposed 

Deferral notice and associated Call for Information.

4. Evaluation of Individual 2013 Inputs

Table II-2. Evaluation of Subpart II (Industrial Wastewater Treatment) 2013 Inputs 

Citation Data Element Assessment by Data Element

98.356b1 Weekly average COD or BOD5 

concentration of wastewater 

entering anaerobic 

wastewater treatment process

Wastewater volumes and characteristics would not provide detailed

insight into the design and operation of the facility’s manufacturing

processes, raw materials, or products. 

98.356b2 Volume of wastewater 

entering each anaerobic 

wastewater treatment process 

for each week the anaerobic 

process was operated.

98.356b3 For each anaerobic 

wastewater treatment 

process, maximum CH4 

production potential (Bo) used 

This data element is a default value specified in the Part 98 

regulatory text (same for all facilities using a given equation); 

therefore it would not reveal any site-specific information.
20

Citation Data Element Assessment by Data Element

as an input to Equation II-1 or 

II-2.

98.356b4 For each anaerobic 

wastewater treatment 

process, methane conversion 

factor (MCF) used as an input 

to Equation II-1 or II-2

Reporters use MCF factors from Table II-1 for anaerobic reactors and 

lagoons. The value selected reveals only the general type of 

wastewater treatment system and does not reveal any detailed 

information on the design of the system or any insights into the 

facility’s manufacturing processes.

98.356b5 For each anaerobic 

wastewater treatment 

process, annual mass of CH4 

generated (calculated using 

Equations II-1 or II-2)

The CH4 generated by the wastewater and recovered would not 

reveal details about wastewater composition or insights into the 

design or operation of the production process. 

98.356d1 Annual quantity of CH4

recovered from the anaerobic 

process (calculated using 

Equation II-4 and used as an 

input in Equation II-5)

98.356d7 CH4 collection efficiency (CE) 

(used in equation II-5)

The collection efficiency is one of 3 default values from table II-2, 

specified by general type of treatment system and cover. The 

defaults do not provide any proprietary information about the design 

or operation of the treatment system.

98.356d8 Annual operating hours for 

the primary destruction device

The operating hours of the destruction devices for gas collected 

from wastewater treatment systems would not provide any 

information about the operating hours of the production process 

generating the wastewater. 

98.356d8 Annual operating hours for 

the backup destruction device

98.356d8 Destruction efficiency of the 

primary destruction device

These data elements are either a default value specified in the Part 

98 regulatory text or a manufacturer’s specified value. Flares are the 

control devices typically used to destroy biogas collected from 

industrial wastewater treatment processes. Most U.S. biogas flare 

manufacturers publish destruction efficiencies on their websites

Examples are:

1. "Our Biogas Enclosed Flare System is specifically designed for 

stringent emissions requirements including the Code of Federal 

Regulations (40 CFR 60.18) to meet or exceed a 98% destruction 

efficiency established by the Environmental Protection 

Agency." http://www.zeeco.com/pdfs/BioGas_Enclosed_Flare_

Web.pdf

2. "Our Biogas Utility Flare System is specifically designed for 

stringent emissions requirements including the Code of Federal 

Regulations (40 CFR 60.18) to meet or exceed a 98% destruction 

efficiency established by the Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA)." http://www.zeeco.com/pdfs/BioGas_Utility_Flare_Web.

pdf

3. "High destruction efficiency: 99.5% meets U.S. and international 

emissions 

standards" http://www.flareindustries.com/products/pdf/1%20F

EF%20Flare%201.pdf

4. "Thanks to concealed combustion, the HOFGASÒ- IFL1c flare 

98.356d8 Destruction efficiency of the 

backup destruction device
21

Citation Data Element Assessment by Data Element

attains more than 99% combustion 

efficiency." http://www.hofstetteruwt.com/web/hofstetter/en/solutions/biogas/ifl1c.html

5. "Methane Destruction: 90% 

min." http://www.bke.co.th/pdf/Enclosed%20Flares%20(web).p

df
22

ATTACHMENT 6 – SUBPART SS (ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURE OR 

REFURBISHMENT) 

SUMMARY OF INFORMATION

1. General Summary of EPA’s Evaluation under Steps 1 and 2 

This subpart applies to facilities that manufacture and/or refurbish gas-insulated substations, 

circuit breakers, other switch-gear, gas-insulated lines, or power transformers containing SF6 or 

PFCs. These are facilities that produce or service the electrical equipment, and not facilities that 

produce SF6 or PFCs.

The market structure analysis indicated that electrical equipment manufacturing is not 

concentrated at the national level (see Attachment 8). However, the NAICS codes used in the 

analysis cover a broader universe of facilities (over 2,000 facilities) than the facilities subject to 

subpart SS. Also, there is a possibility that there might be concentration at the regional level or 

by product. Therefore, EPA proceeded to evaluate the individual data elements that were 

deferred until 2013.

Reporting of all 17 “Inputs to Emission Equations” data elements in Subpart SS was deferred 

until 2013. Table SS-1 in Attachment 6 lists the deferred input data elements. 

Information on the design and quantity of each type of unit produced, production capacity, 

details of the production processes employed, the number and types of units refurbished or 

recycled, the costs of production and/or refurbishment, product inventories, profit margins, and 

forward-looking information regarding customer orders are considered proprietary by this sector. 

None of the Subpart SS data elements provide this type of information. The 10 data elements in 

§98.456(a) through (j) consist of the beginning and end of year inventories of stored SF6 and 

PFCs, disbursements of SF6 and PFCs (shipped in equipment or containers to customers, 

sent to recyclers, sent for offsite destruction, returned to gas supplier), and acquisitions of 

SF6 and PFCs (purchases from suppliers, returned in equipment, returned from offsite 

recyclers). Although the amount of SF6 and PFCs stored at a facility at the beginning and end 

of the reporting year (§98.456(a) and (b)), the amount of each gas purchased from bulk suppliers 

(§98.456(c)), and the amount of each gas returned to suppliers (§98.456(h)) could indicate 

changes at the facility, they do not provide any information that would be proprietary since 

changes in raw material inventories and amount of gas used cannot be linked to the underlying 

reasons for the change. For example, an increase in bulk purchases and inventory could be due 

to an expansion of the facility’s storage area, an increase in production of a particular unit, 

change in the design of a new unit, an increase in the number of units refurbished, or a change in 

the type of units produced or refurbished. The amount of SF6 and PFCs purchased in bulk from 

gas suppliers (§98.456(c)), the amount of SF6 and PFCs delivered to customers in new 

equipment (§98.456(f)), the amount of SF6 and PFCs delivered to customers in containers 

(§98.456(g)), the amount of SF6 and PFCs returned to suppliers (§98.456(h)), amount of each 

type of gas sent off site for destruction (§98.456(i)), and the amount sent to be recycled 

(§98.456(j)) are total amounts for the facility. These data elements do not provide any insight 

into the design of new products, cost of manufacture of any new products, cost of refurbishment 

of old equipment, profit margins, or product demand. Based on the information provided in the 

2011 GHGRP annual reports, the EPA determined these data elements cannot be used to 
23

calculate the quantity of each type or model of equipment produced or refurbished since 

manufacturers in this industry produce and/or refurbish a range of different products at each 

facility. The amount of each type of gas sent off site for destruction (§98.456(i)) and the amount 

sent to be recycled (§98.456(j)) do not reveal any proprietary information, such as the source of 

the gas, the number and type of units refurbished, the cost of disposal/recycling, or the name and 

location of the company that receives the gas for destruction and/or recycling. 

Two data elements provide facility-specific information about the equipment used to charge 

manufactured electrical products, refurbished units, and/or cylinders: site-specific emission 

factors (§98.456(m)) and number of fill operations (§98.456(n)) for each valve-hose 

combination. The number of items/units filled (§98.456(n)) provides only the number of units 

filled by a particular valve-hose combination and does not provide any sensitive information, 

such as the type(s) of unit filled (e.g., cylinder, make and model of refurbished units), number of 

units manufactured, or amount of gas filled into each unit. For example, the units filled may be 

newly manufactured units, old units being returned to the manufacturer for refurbishment, 

cylinders, or other containers. The site-specific emission factor (§98.456(m)) provides 

information about how much gas is emitted per unit during filling operations. Although this 

information indicates how much gas is lost during filling operations, the costs associated with 

losses of gas from filling operations represent a small portion of the overall operating costs of the 

facility and cannot be related directly to the cost of producing or refurbishing a specific model of 

unit sold by the manufacturer. 

Three data elements are used in equation SS-6 to calculate SF6 emissions from equipment that is 

installed at an off-site electric power transmission or distribution locations before title of the 

equipment is transferred to the customer: the nameplate capacity (§98.456(s)), amount of 

SF6/PFCs charged to the equipment before it leaves the manufacturing/ refurbishment facility 

(§98.456(r)), and the amount of SF6/PFCs used to fill the equipment onsite (§98.456(q)). 

These data elements do not reveal any proprietary information about the design of the individual 

electrical equipment, the manufacturing processes used to produce individual electrical 

equipment products, costs of production, or profit margins. They are reported annually as 

cumulative totals reported at the facility-level and therefore, provide no information regarding 

the number and type of units sold by an individual facility. They provide no insights into annual 

sales data since the quantities are not reported by model, type of equipment or by customer. 

These data elements cannot be used to back-calculate the number of units installed by a 

manufacturer because each manufacturer installs a number of different types/models of electrical 

equipment. 

The final data element, the average amount of SF6 and PFC charged to each type of new 

product prior to shipment (§98.456(o)) does not reveal any information about the specific 

design of new products, manufacturing processes, or production costs. Although the information 

is reported for each model, the reporter may use any unique identifier and is not required to 

report the actual model name or model numbers. Therefore, the amount of charge cannot be 

related to any individual unit. Since emissions are reported by gas at the facility-level and 

facilities manufacture and/or refurbish several types and models of electrical equipment, the 

amount of gas charged to each product cannot be used to back-calculate the quantities of each 

product manufactured or refurbished. 
24

There were no comments in response to the initial CBI proposal (75 FR 39094, July 7, 2010), 

proposed deferral notice (75 FR 81350, December 27, 2012), and associated Call for Information 

(75 FR 81366, December 27, 2012) asserting that release of subpart SS inputs to emission 

equations would cause harm. 

Based on the above analysis for this subpart, EPA did not proceed to Steps 3 and 4 of the 

assessment, evaluation of potential alternative calculation or verification methods.

2. Summary of Public Availability of Subpart SS Deferred Data Elements

Data on nameplate capacities of individual equipment are generally available through product 

specification documents and maintenance manuals provided by the equipment manufacturer. In 

some cases, the capacity information is marked on the equipment. Information on the amounts 

of SF6 and PFCs purchased, beginning and end of year storage inventories, and the amounts of 

SF6 and PFCs transferred offsite is obscure information that is unlikely to be publicly available 

from Title V permits, federal and state databases, or journals. 

3. Summary of Public Comments on CBI and Data Deferral Actions

Table SS-1. Summary of Public Comments on CBI and Data Deferral

Federal Register Notice Summary of Comments

July 7, 2010 Part 98 

Confidentiality 

Determination Proposal 

(75 FR 39094)

There were no public comments claiming that release of subpart SS 

inputs to emission equations would cause harm. 

December 27, 2010 

Proposed Deferral (75 FR 

81350) and Call for 

Information (75 FR 81366)

There were no public comments claiming that release of subpart SS 

inputs to emission equations would cause harm in response to the 

proposed Deferral notice and associated Call for Information.

4. Evaluation of Individual 2013 Inputs

Table SS-2. Evaluation of Subpart SS (Electrical Equipment Manufacture or 

Refurbishment) 2013 Inputs 

Citation Data Element Assessment by Data Element

98.456a Pounds of SF6and PFCs stored in containers at the 

beginning of the year.

Release of these data elements do not disclose 

any proprietary information about the design 

of the electrical equipment, the 

manufacturing processes used to produce the

equipment, production costs, number of new 

units produced and/or refurbished, market

demand for specific models, or profit margins. 

Data elements §98.456(c) through (j) are 

reported annually at the facility-level and 

reveal the overall amount of each gas , but 

provide no insight into the quantities, types or 

designs of electrical equipment produced or 

refurbished. Based on the information 

98.456b Pounds of SF6and PFCs stored in containers at the 

end of the year.

98.456c Pounds of SF6and PFCs purchased in bulk.

98.456d Pounds of SF6and PFCs returned by equipment 

users with or inside equipment.

98.456e Pounds of SF6and PFCs returned to site from off site 

after recycling.

98.456f Pounds of SF6and PFCs inside new equipment 

delivered to customers.

98.456g Pounds of SF6and PFCs delivered to equipment 

users in containers.
25

Citation Data Element Assessment by Data Element

98.456h Pounds of SF6and PFCs returned to suppliers. provided in the 2011 GHGRP annual reports, 

the EPA determined these data elements 

cannot be used to calculate the quantity of 

each type or model of equipment produced or 

refurbished since manufacturers in this 

industry produce and/or refurbish a range of 

different products at each facility.

98.456i Pounds of SF6and PFCs sent off site for destruction.

98.456j Pounds of SF6and PFCs sent off site to be recycled.

98.456m The values for EFC for each hose and valve 

combination and the associated valve fitting sizes 

and hose diameters.

Provides facility-specific information about the 

equipment used to charge manufactured 

electrical products, refurbished units, and/or 

cylinders for each valve-hose combination. This 

would reveal the number of items/units filled

and the amount of gas emitted during filling 

operations, but does not reveal any 

proprietary information because the identity of 

the units filled is not reported. The units could 

be newly manufactured units, old units being 

returned to the manufacturer for 

refurbishment, or cylinders or other 

containers.

98.456n The total number of fill operations for each hose 

and valve combination, or, FCi of Equation SS–5 of 

this subpart.

98.456o The mean value for each make, model, and group 

of conditions if the mass of SF6or the PFC disbursed 

to customers in new equipment over the period p is 

determined by assuming that it is equal to the 

equipment's nameplate capacity or, in cases where 

equipment is shipped with a partial charge, equal to 

its partial shipping charge.

The release of this data element would not 

reveal any proprietary information about the 

specific design of new products, the cost of 

production, or any of the other information 

identified as proprietary above.

98.456q Pounds of SF6and PFCs used to fill equipment at 

off-site electric power transmission or distribution 

locations, or MF, of Equation SS–6 of this subpart.

The total nameplate capacity and total amount 

of SF6/PFCs charged to electrical equipment 

installed at electric power transmission and 

distribution locations are cumulative totals for 

all electrical equipment installed onsite and are 

reported at the facility-level. These data 

elements do not reveal any proprietary

information, such as the design, costs of 

production, manufacturing processes, or 

market demand of the individual electrical 

equipment. Since electrical equipment 

manufacturers/refurbishers generally supply

and/or refurbish several types of equipment 

and many different models, this information 

provides no insights into the quantities, pricing 

structures, types or designs of electrical 

equipment installed onsite at electrical power 

transmission and distribution locations.

98.456r Pounds of SF6and PFCs used to charge the 

equipment that is installed at off-site electric power 

transmission and distribution stations prior to the 

equipment leaving the electrical equipment 

manufacturer or refurbishment facility, or MC, of 

Equation SS–6 of this subpart.

98.456s The nameplate capacity of the equipment, in 

pounds, installed at off-site electric power 

transmission or distribution locations used to 

determine emissions from installation, or NI of 

Equation SS–6 of this subpart.

98.456t For any missing data, report the substitute 

parameters used to estimate emissions in their 

absence.

Same assessment as provided above for 

individual parameters.

ATTACHMENT 7 -- SUBPART TT (INDUSTRIAL WASTE LANDFILLS) 
26

SUMMARY OF INFORMATION 

1. General Summary of EPA’s Evaluation under Steps 1 and 2 

Subpart TT applies to open and closed landfills, other than MSW landfills, that have accepted 

industrial waste during or after 1980 and are located at a facility with a total landfill design 

capacity above 300,000 metric tons of waste. There are various exemptions, e.g., for landfills 

accepting only C&D or various inert wastes. The landfills may be located at industrial facilities 

such as pulp and paper manufacturing or food processing plants or may be located separately. 

The market structure analysis showed that about half the NAICS associated with the industries 

expected to report under subpart TT are moderately concentrated at the national level (see 

Attachment 8). Therefore, EPA further evaluated the individual data elements that were deferred 

until 2013.

For industrial facilities that have landfills located on-site, the types of information that are 

considered proprietary or have previously been determined to be CBI in the May 26, 2011 final 

CBI determination notice include information on quantities and composition of raw materials 

used in the manufacturing processes and information on quantities and compositions of 

manufactured products. However, landfills are an ancillary operation at industrial facilities and 

are not central to manufacturing processes or to production cost structures. Data about landfill 

design and operation follows standard waste management practices and does not reveal 

proprietary information about manufacturing processes, raw materials, or production quantities. 

Industrial landfills that are not located at manufacturing facilities can compete for contracts to 

dispose of industrial waste. The types of data that could potentially be considered proprietary to 

landfill facility owners if publicly released are economic data such as disposal fees the landfill 

charges, revenues, landfill construction and operating costs, and contract or client lists. Such data 

could allow give competitors insights that they could use to develop their own pricing structures.

Reporting of 13 “Inputs to Emission Equations” data elements in Subpart TT (listed in 

Attachment 7) was deferred until 2013. Four other data elements were deferred until 2015; they 

are not discussed in this memo. The 2013 input data elements for landfills (such as the year the 

landfill opened and closed, landfill capacity, annual amount of waste, and methane 

generation from landfills) do not reveal any significant information about the facility production 

processes. In particular, the subpart TT input data elements do not reveal detailed waste 

composition data that could be used to determine production process designs, raw material 

quantities and compositions, or actual production rates or product compositions; nor do they 

reveal economic information about the industrial landfills.

For several input values (e.g., fraction of methane in landfill gas, degradable organic carbon 

content (DOC), decay rate (k), methane correction factor) most landfills will use default 

values provided in the rule. While the k and DOC defaults vary by general type of waste (e.g., 

pulp and paper waste, food processing waste), these waste types are not specific enough to 

provide any insight into facility production processes or the other types of sensitive information 

discussed above. 

One data element, modeled methane generation, can be back-calculated for landfills without 

gas collection systems from the reported annual methane emissions (which are emissions data 
27

and will be publicly released) and the default oxidation factor which is the same for all landfills 

and is already publicly available in the Part 98 regulatory text. For landfills with gas collection 

systems, the quantity of landfill methane generated does not reveal any details about 

manufacturing processes, products, or raw materials.

Three of the data elements (last year landfill accepted waste and capacity of the landfill for 

closed landfills using Eq. TT-4 and landfill surface area by cover type for landfills with gas 

collection systems) are the same as data elements that were finalized as non-CBI in the May 26, 

2011 CBI determination notice when submitted by landfills using alternative methods for which 

the data are not inputs. See Attachment 7 Table TT-2 for details. The final non-CBI 

determinations for these data elements were not challenged.

There was one comment regarding confidentiality of subpart TT data elements in response to 

EPA’s July 2010 proposed confidentiality determinations. As a result the EPA deferred until 

2015 four of the input data elements that could reveal manufacturing facility production rates. 

There were no public comments asserting that release of subpart TT inputs to emission equations 

would cause harm in response to the proposed Deferral notice and associated Call for 

Information. Likewise, there were no public comments asserting that release of any new subpart 

TT data elements would cause harm in response to the January 10, 2012 CBI and deferral 

revisions proposal.

Based on the above analysis for this subpart, EPA did not proceed to Steps 3 and 4 of the 

assessment, evaluation of potential alternative calculation or verification methods.

2. Summary of Public Availability of Subpart TT Deferred Data Elements

The specific deferred data elements in subpart TT were not found to be generally available in 

EPA databases. A preliminary search of National Emissions Inventory identified only a couple 

industrial landfills that might be subject to subpart TT with little specific data. The LMOP 

database contains only MSW landfill data and does not contain dedicated industrial landfills. 

Review of several Title V permits (e.g., for pulp and paper and food processing facilities) did not 

yield information on industrial landfills. There are some landfills that accept industrial waste 

listed in the Waste Business Journal, which is available for purchase, but it is not clear which of 

these would be subject to subpart TT and which are construction and demolition or other 

excluded landfills. This reference contains data fields such as landfill capacity, waste in place, 

waste acceptance rate, and open and closure years, but the data fields are not fully populated.

3. Summary of Public Comments on CBI and Data Deferral Actions

Table TT-1. Summary of Public Comments on CBI and Data Deferral

Federal Register Notice Summary of Comments

July 7, 2010 Part 98 

Confidentiality 

Determination Proposal 

(75 FR 39094)

ACC was the only stakeholder to identify any subpart TT data elements 

as CBI. ACC stated that "Knowing key information about waste streams 

would allow a competitor to determine production information at the 

affected facility." [Note that inputs to Eq. TT-2 and TT-3 that would allow 

back-calculation of production rates are deferred until 2015 and are out 

of the scope of this memorandum.
28

December 27, 2010 

Proposed Deferral (75 FR 

81350) and Call for 

Information (75 FR 81366)

There were no public comments claiming that release of subpart TT 

inputs to emission equations would cause harm in response to the 

proposed Deferral notice and associated Call for Information. DuPont 

commented on alternative verification processes that could be used for 

multiple subparts including TT, but did not provide comments that any 

subpart TT data elements would cause harm if released.

January 10, 2012 CBI and 

deferral revisions proposal 

(77 FR 1434)

There were no public comments claiming that release of any new 

subpart TT data elements would cause harm in response to this notice, 

which proposed that new subpart TT data elements were non-CBI and 

deferred reporting of one new subpart TT input to an emission equation 

until 2013.

4. Evaluation of Individual 2013 Inputs

Table TT-2. Evaluation of Subpart TT (Industrial Waste Landfills) 2013 Inputs Deferred

Until 2013, updated per August 13, 2012 final CBI and deferral revisions (77 FR 48072)

Citation Data Element Assessment by Data Element

98.466a2 The year the landfill first started accepting 

waste for disposal 

Year landfill opened does not reveal any proprietary 

information about manufacturing facility production 

processes, raw materials, or production quantities, nor 

does it reveal industrial landfill economic information.

98.466a3 Last year the landfill accepted waste (for 

closed landfills using Equation TT-4)

Per May 26, 2011 final CBI rule, these data elements 

were determined to be non-CBI when submitted by 

facilities that use other calculation equations such that 

the data are not inputs to emission equations. The 

determination they are non-CBI was not challenged.

98.466a4 Capacity of the landfill in metric tons (for 

closed landfills using Equation TT-4)

98.466b3 Fraction of CH4 in landfill gas Fraction of CH4 in landfill gas does not reveal detailed 

information on the composition of the waste or any 

manufacturing process or economic data. A default 

value in the rule (0.5) will be used by all landfills 

without active gas collection systems.

98.466b4 Methane correction factor (MCF) used in 

calculations. Identified as a 2013 deferred 

input in 8/13/12 final CBI and deferral 

revisions (77 FR48072)

MCF is dependent on landfill aeration practices, not on 

waste characteristics. A default will be used by most 

landfills. MCF does not reveal any information on waste 

composition, manufacturing processes, or landfill 

economic data.

98.466c1 For each waste stream identified in 

98.466(b), the decay rate (k) value used in 

the equation TT-1

Default value based on general type of waste (pulp and 

paper, food processing, wood and wood product, C&D, 

inert, other) and climate. Does not reveal any details 

about the production process raw materials, design or 

operation, or production quantities.

98.466c4i Value of landfill capacity (LFC) (if Equation 

TT-4 is used)

These data elements do not provide any proprietary 

information about the manufacturing facility or its 

processes, raw materials, and production. They also do 

not provide any economic information about the 

landfill.

98.466c4ii YrData (if Equation TT-4 is used)

98.466c4iii YrOpen, either 1960 or year landfill first 

received waste (if Equation TT-4 is used)

98.466d2 For each year of landfilling starting with 

the “start year” and each year thereafter 

up to the current reporting year, Quantity 

These data elements do not provide any proprietary 

information about the manufacturing facility or its 

processes raw materials, and production. They also do 
29

Citation Data Element Assessment by Data Element

of waste (Wx) disposed of in the landfill 

for each waste stream

not provide any economic information about the 

landfill.

98.466d3 Degradable organic carbon (DOCx) value 

used in calculations

98.466e2 Surface area (in square meters) at the 

start of the reporting year for the landfill 

sections that contain waste and that are 

associated with the selected cover type 

(for facilities using a landfill gas collection 

system)

Per May 26, 2011 final CBI rule, this data element was 

determined to be non-CBI when submitted by facilities 

that use other calculation equations such that the data 

are not inputs to emission equations. The 

determination they are non-CBI was not challenged.

98.466f Modeled annual methane generation rate 

for the reporting year calculated using 

Equation TT-1 (used in Equation TT-6)

Landfill methane generation does not provide any 

information about the production process. Also, for 

landfills without gas collection systems, this data 

element can be back-calculated from reported annual 

CH4 emissions and default oxidation factor that is the 

same for all landfills and is listed in the Part 98 

regulatory text.
30

ATTACHMENT 8 –MARKET STUCTURE ANALYSIS

Importance of Market Structure. 

Market structure affects firms’ ability to use information about other firms in their market. 

Market structure is defined in terms of the number of firms supplying a commodity in the 

market, and the degree of control that individual firms have over the price they obtain for their 

product. The market, in turn, is defined in terms of the commodity marketed and the geographic 

scope of the market.

Competitive markets are characterized by many suppliers and products that are identical or 

nearly identical, in terms of product characteristics that users value. In such markets, firms are 

“price takers”; that is, they are unable to influence the market price, and must determine their 

profit-maximizing production level as a function of the price set by the market. In such markets, 

strategic behavior is not possible because there are too many competitors, making it impossible 

for them to make decisions based on their competitors’ actions, and thereby affect market price. 

Thus, for firms to be able to use information to gain a competitive advantage, the number of 

firms in the market must be small enough that firms can identify their competitors, and identify 

critical information about their competitors’ operations. Markets with a relatively small number 

of firms are termed "concentrated". The following sections describe methods for assessing 

whether markets are concentrated and present results. 

The concentration analysis was performed only for the coal mining and manufacturing sectors 

for which GHGRP input to emission equation data elements were deferred until 2013. For the 

manufacturing sectors, we used the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) values published by the 

Census Bureau. For the coal mining sector, we evaluated production data and other industry 

statistics since the Census Bureau does not provide HHI data for the non-manufacturing sectors.

The concentration analysis was not performed for subparts DD (electrical transmission and 

distribution)) and HH (MSW landfills). This analysis is not applicable to these sectors because 

they have different market structures. For these sectors, a qualitative assessment of the market 

structure was completed.

Process for Identifying Markets That Are Concentrated or Moderately Concentrated.

Economists assess market concentration using measures that characterize the share of the market 

served by the largest firms. Specific tools used include the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI). 

For a given market, the HHI is calculated by squaring the market share of each firm competing in 

the market, then summing the squared shares.

HHI = Σisi

2 , where si = the market share of the ith firm.

Potential values of the HHI range from near zero (if each of the top 50 firms has one-50th if the 

output of the group(50*(1/50^2)), to 10,000, if one firm has 100 percent of the value 
31

(100^2=10,000). The HHI reflects both the number of firms in the market and the relative size of 

the firms, and assumes larger values, (1) the smaller the number of firms in the market and (2) 

the greater the disparity in size between the firms. The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) 6 and 

the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) use the HHI to identify markets where there are potential 

anti-trust concerns. They consider markets with and HHI below 1,000 to be unconcentrated; 

markets with HHI between 1,000 and 1,800 are considered moderately concentrated, and 

markets with HHI above 1,800 to be highly concentrated. The Census Bureau computes and 

publishes HHI for the manufacturing sectors, defined using North American Industry 

Classification System codes or NAICS codes.7

Economists define markets at the product or process level, because customers make purchasing 

decisions for specific products or services. Some sectors (defined at the 6-digit NAICS code 

level) that are not concentrated at the national sector level may produce some products for which 

there are sufficiently few suppliers that either reduced competition or the use of information to 

gain a competitive advantage could be possible. Similarly, some products are traded in regional, 

rather than national markets; for these, even if the sector is not concentrated at the national level, 

based upon its HHI, one or more of the regional markets may be concentrated. While identifying 

a concentrated or moderately concentrated NAICS is sufficient to identify subparts in which 

facilities are aware of their competitors and thus revealing sensitive information would have the 

potential to lead to a competitive advantage or disadvantage, it is not the only indicator. Some 

NAICS may include multiple industry sectors, only one of which is covered by a subpart. If this 

is the case, the industry sector may have concentrated or moderately concentrated markets even 

if the overall NAICS is not concentrated or moderately concentrated. Similarly, the sector 

represented by a subpart may have markets that are regional in nature. While the sector does not 

appear concentrated or moderately concentrated at the national level, regional markets, with 

fewer suppliers, may be concentrated. 

Therefore, while the market structure analysis provides an indication of the potential for harm, 

EPA further evaluated each of the individual data elements that were deferred until 2013 to 

determine, per the “Process for Evaluating and Potentially Amending Part 98 Inputs to Emission 

Equations” (Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0929), whether such harm would be likely to occur 

if collected and released. This assessment of the individual data elements is described in 

Attachments 1 - 7.

Results for subparts II, SS, and TT.

 6 http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/testimony/hhi.htm

7 http://www.census.gov/econ/concentration.html
32

EPA identified the 6-digit NAICS codes associated with the industries that are required to submit 

GHGRP reports under these subparts.8 We then obtained concentration information that is 

compiled by the Census Bureau for manufacturing NAICS. (The census does not provide 

concentration information for non-manufacturing NAICS). To begin our assessment of the 

potential for the release of the input data elements to lead to reduced competition or one firm 

gaining a competitive advantage, we conducted an assessment of the level of sector 

concentration at the NAICS code level. If the NAICS codes identified are concentrated or 

moderately concentrated at the national level, the firms in the subpart likely are aware of each 

others’ actions. 

The table below lists concentration ratios for the 6-digit NAICS codes listed in the preamble of 

the rules that finalized these subparts (75 FR 74774 and 75 FR 39736), as well as values of the 

Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) published by the U.S. Census Bureau for affected 

manufacturing NAICS codes. 

Table. Herfindahl-Hirschman Index Values for Subparts II, SS, and TT

Subpart NAICS

NAICS 

Description HHI, VOS HHI, VA Finding

II Industrial Wastewater 311411

Frozen fruit, juice 

and vegetable 

manufacturing 

facilities. 586.6 648.1 Unconcentrated

II Industrial Wastewater 311421

Fruit and vegetable 

canning facilities. 254.8 295.2 Unconcentrated

II Industrial Wastewater 311611

Meat processing 

facilities. 1046.5 644

Moderately 

Concentrated

II Industrial Wastewater 322110

Pulp mills

1023.5 1235.7

Moderately 

Concentrated

II Industrial Wastewater 322121

Paper mills.

758.9 1036.2

Moderately 

Concentrated

II Industrial Wastewater 322122 Newsprint mills. N/A N/A N/A

II Industrial Wastewater 322130 Paperboard mills. 713.1 768.6 Unconcentrated

II Industrial Wastewater 324110 Petroleum refineries 806.5 811.6 Unconcentrated

II Industrial Wastewater 325193

Ethanol 

manufacturing 

facilities. 275.1 298 Unconcentrated

SS Electrical Equip Manuf. 335311 Power, distribution, 

and specialty 

524.2 541.7 Unconcentrated

 8 The NAICS codes used were based on expected reporters as verified data for these subparts was not yet 

available.
33

transformer 

manufacturing

SS Electrical Equip Manuf 335312 Motor and generator 

manufacturing

421.6 430.7

Unconcentrated

SS Electrical Equip Manuf 335313 Switchgear and 

switchboard 

apparatus 

manufacturing

718.8 693.8

Unconcentrated

SS Electrical Equip Manuf 335314 Relay and industrial 

control 

manufacturing

359.4 348.4

Unconcentrated

TT Industrial Landfills 221320

Sewage treatment 

facilities N/A N/A N/A

TT Industrial Landfills 311411

Frozen fruit, juice 

and vegetable 

manufacturing 

facilities. 586.6 648.1 Unconcentrated

TT Industrial Landfills 311421

Fruit and vegetable 

canning facilities. 254.8 295.2 Unconcentrated

TT Industrial Landfills 311611

Meat processing 

facilities. 1046.5 644

Moderately 

Concentrated

TT Industrial Landfills 322110

Pulp mills

1023.5 1235.7

Moderately 

Concentrated

TT Industrial Landfills 322121

Paper mills.

758.9 1036.2

Moderately 

Concentrated

TT Industrial Landfills 322122 Newsprint mills. N/A N/A N/A

TT Industrial Landfills 322130 Paperboard mills. 713.1 768.6 Unconcentrated

TT Industrial Landfills 562212 Solid waste landfills N/A N/A N/A

Notes: HHI VA is the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index calculated on value added data (US Census Bureau). HHI VOS 

is the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index calculated on value of shipments data (US Census Bureau.) N/A indicates than 

an HHI was not available because some of the data needed to compute it is missing, or because the 

NAICS is not a manufacturing NAICS.

Results for subpart C

Many sources subject to subpart C are also reporters for other subparts. Thus, there are numerous 

NAICS codes that would apply to subpart C units. Because there are many different sectors 

within subpart C, many of the sectors may demonstrate at least moderate concentration either 

nationally, or in regional or product-specific markets, and may allow firms to identify their 

competitors. As a result, EPA could not conclude that markets would not be concentrated for 

some subpart C reporters, and proceeded to review the individual data elements.
34

The one segment of subpart C reporters for which reporting input data elements is not likely to 

result in reduced competition is EGUs that are owned and operated by electric utilities. Electric 

utilities are highly regulated, and in most states have service monopolies in their service 

territories. Many traditional electric utilities are vertically integrated, from generation through 

transmission and distribution. As a result, within their service territories, these utilities have no 

competition.

Results for subpart FF

Although we were not able to use HHI values to determine the market concentration for the coal 

mining industry, we were able to use other data to assess the relative market concentration and 

thereby determine the potential economic harm. The U.S. coal industry includes about 650 

mining companies.9 However, data published by the U.S. Energy Information Administration 

shows that five companies account for about 60% of total U.S. production.10 Furthermore, 

imports account for only 5 percent of the U.S. market due to the high cost of transportation 

compared to price.6

 Thus, we conclude that the coal mining industry is a moderately 

concentrated industry in which the major firms are aware of each others’ actions.

References

Census Bureau. Economic Census, Concentration Ratios http://www.census.gov/econ/concentration.html

Economic Census 2007, datasets EC0731SR12 and EC0731SR13

 9 First Research, Inc. Market Research Report for the Coal Mining Industry. Published October, 8, 2012. 10 U.S. Energy Information Administration, Annual Coal Report 2011. Table 10.

http://www.eia.gov/coal/annual/pdf/acr.pdf.