OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

1

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Public Hearing

Greenhouse Gas Mandatory Reporting Rule, 

Additional Sources of F-Gases Subparts I

(Electronics Manufacturing), L (Fluorinated Gas

Production), DD (Electric Transmission and

Distribution Equipment Use), QQ (Imports and

Exports of Fluorinated GHGs inside

pre-charged equipment and closed-cell foams) and

SS (Electrical Equipment Manufacture or

Refurbishment)

9:05 a.m. to 11:55 a.m.

Tuesday, April 20, 2010

1310 L St, NW

Washington, DC
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

2

C O N T E N T S

 

 PAGE

Welcoming Remarks

 Paul Gunning, Presiding Officer...............3

Introductory Remarks

 Paul Gunning..................................4

Morning Public Comments

David Stirpe, 

 Alliance for Responsible Atmospheric Policy...8

Thomas Diamond, 

 Semiconductor Industry Association...........12

Peter Zalzal, Environmental Defense Fund.......25

Daniel Chartier, Edison Electric Institute.....29

- - -
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

3

1 P R O C E E D I N G S

2 Welcoming Remarks

3 MR. GUNNING: Good morning everybody. I 

4 am Paul Gunning with the Environmental Protection 

5 Agency here in the Climate Change Division, and I 

6 welcome you all here this morning to our public 

7 hearing on the Mandatory Reporting Rule 

8 specifically additional source categories 

9 covering the fluorinated greenhouse gases.

10 Thank you all, first of all, for coming 

11 this morning. We are looking forward to hearing 

12 your comments and insights and perspectives on 

13 these proposed subparts for Mandatory Reporting 

14 Rule. 

15 Introductory Remarks

16 As you well know, the purpose of the 

17 hearing today is to receive your comments and we 

18 are looking forward to hear those comments. 

19 We’re specifically covering five subparts under 

20 the Mandatory Reporting Rule, specifically 

21 Subpart I which covers electronics manufacturing, 

22 Subpart L which covers fluorinated gas 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

4

1 production, Subpart DD which covers electric 

2 transmission and distribution and equipment use, 

3 Subpart QQ which covers importers and exporters 

4 of fluorinated greenhouse gases contained in 

5 charged equipment and closed-cell foams and 

6 finally Subpart SS, electrical equipment 

7 manufacture or refurbishment. See if I said that 

8 right this morning with my coffee.

9 Of course we’re covering this hearing and 

10 holding this hearing today in accordance and in 

11 support of the Clean Air Act which does provide 

12 interested parties the opportunity to present 

13 their views, arguments and perspectives on this 

14 proposed rule. We also of course had an open 

15 docket and are requesting and encouraging you to 

16 also submit written comments. This hearing this 

17 morning provides the opportunity for your oral 

18 presentations. 

19 As you’ll note with the mikes – I know 

20 it’s a very small room, but we are recording this 

21 public hearing and we will be developing a 

22 transcript that will be made available and put in 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

5

1 the docket.

2 As a point of note the docket and the 

3 docket number is HQ – if you’re interested in 

4 finding this – OAR-2009-0927. And again, we’ll 

5 make that transcript available and the docket 

6 will also be available electronically on 

7 regulations.gov.

8 So this morning we’ll be conducting this 

9 hearing in an informal manner. We will not be 

10 applying the official rules of evidence. I will 

11 be the presiding officer. 

12 We have several other EPA officials in 

13 the room here today this morning that have worked 

14 hard and diligently on the proposed rule and will 

15 be working to make this a final rule. I’d like 

16 to just quickly introduce those folks who have 

17 put a lot of effort into this rule, Debbie 

18 Ottinger, Kirsten Kappel, Scott Bartos who is not 

19 here this morning – I’m looking around the room –

20 there’s Sally Rand, okay, Sally Rand, and is that 

21 everybody that’s here this morning? Okay. So 

22 they’ll be here and listening closely to the 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

6

1 comments you’re providing. 

2 In terms of the process and the order for 

3 this morning, I’d like to ask everyone to try to 

4 keep their comments and thoughts to around ten 

5 minutes. I’d like to please ask everybody to 

6 turn off your cell phones, cell phones and 

7 Blackberries. They do disturb the hearing.

8 A number of you have signed in already. 

9 I will be calling folks up in order of who signed 

10 up. And please in advance of delivering your 

11 comments, note your name and your organizational 

12 affiliation if appropriate. 

13 In addition, again, to emphasize this is 

14 an opportunity for oral statements. We will ask 

15 clarifying questions, but we also encourage you 

16 to submit your comments to the docket especially 

17 if there is a variation between your written and 

18 oral presentations.

19 It looks like at the moment we only have 

20 a few speakers signed up this morning, so as a 

21 point of order we’ll just proceed and see if 

22 there are additional individuals that are 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

7

1 interested in commenting and take breaks 

2 accordingly. One other logistical note, the 

3 restrooms are located just right down this 

4 hallway if you haven’t found them already. 

5 And let me return to my seat here and 

6 we’ll begin the hearing. Okay, so I will start 

7 introducing the first person, David Stirpe. I’d 

8 like to invite you to come up please for your 

9 comments.

10 One additional note, obviously we’re 

11 dealing with many subparts this morning and I 

12 realize that some of you may be commenting on 

13 several subparts. So, as you deliver your 

14 comments, please preface them with which subpart 

15 or subparts you’re addressing this morning. 

16 Thank you.

17 MR. STIRPE: Good morning. My name is 

18 Dave Stirpe and I’m with the Alliance for 

19 Responsible Atmospheric Policy. On behalf of the 

20 Alliance and the industry coalition, I am pleased 

21 to make some comments regarding the proposed rule 

22 addressing mandatory reporting of certain 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

8

1 fluorinated greenhouse gases. I’m going to 

2 comment mostly on Subpart L.

3 The Alliance is an industry coalition 

4 that was organized in 1980 to address the issue 

5 of stratospheric ozone depletion. It is composed 

6 of manufacturers and businesses including 

7 associations that produce and rely on CFCs, HCFCs 

8 and HFCs. Today, the Alliance coordinates 

9 industry participation and the development of 

10 reasonable international government policies 

11 regarding ozone protection climate change.

12 The Alliance has a long history of 

13 working in a positive manner with EPA on these 

14 issues. We believe that accurate and timely data 

15 is necessary when decision makers and businesses 

16 work to formulate policy. 

17 In addition to working with EPA over 

18 several decades to voluntarily report and 

19 ascertain certain emissions of HCFCs and HFCs, 

20 Alliance members are mindful of efforts to reduce 

21 emissions of these compounds including 

22 containment, recovery, recycling, reclamation and 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

9

1 destruction. We’ve always advocated the 

2 responsible use of these compounds in ways that 

3 have significantly reduced emissions, allowed the 

4 phase down of HCFCs, encouraged a smooth 

5 transition of alternatives and provided societal 

6 value for citizens who rely on energy-efficient 

7 air conditioning, refrigeration and foam 

8 insulation.

9 The Alliance appreciates EPA’s careful 

10 consideration of the public comments submitted by 

11 the Alliance and its members last year on the 

12 original proposal to report greenhouse gases. 

13 We thank you for revising and re14 proposing significant pieces of the proposal. It 

15 appears to us that EPA addressed many concerns 

16 including the monitoring and emissions reporting 

17 procedures that appear to have improved.

18 We plan to more close examine the rule of 

19 the next days and we will elaborate on our 

comments in writing by June 11t h 20 .

21 The Alliance appreciates EPA’s efforts to 

22 integrate Subpart L and last year’s Subpart OO to 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

10

1 minimize overlap. Both the proposed Subpart L 

2 and the final Subpart OO require fluorinated 

3 greenhouse gas reporting. EPA should develop a 

4 method to consolidate production reporting 

5 between the two subparts.

6 As much of the required reporting 

7 information is confidential business information, 

8 the Alliance supports EPA developing appropriate 

9 confidential business information protections in 

10 the pending part 98 reporting tool. 

11 The Alliance appreciates EPA allowing 

12 best available monitoring methods for the entire 

13 2011 calendar year since there’s a large amount 

14 of preparation, monitoring and record keeping, 

15 that each reporting facility must establish to 

16 comply with proposed Subpart L. However, some 

17 may be concerned that a one-year implementation 

18 period may not be adequate. The Alliance will 

19 examine the requirement for importers and 

20 exporters of pre-charged equipment and closed 

21 cell foam to report their imports and exports to 

22 EPA and may elaborate on this further in written 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

11

1 comments. 

2 Thank you for the opportunity to comment 

3 today. 

4 MR. GUNNING: Thanks, David.

5 Okay. The next speaker, I’d like to ask 

6 Tom Diamond to come up, please. Thank you.

7 MR. DIAMOND: My name is Tom Diamond. 

8 [Pause.]

9 Good morning. My name is Tom Diamond. 

10 I’m the Director of Environmental Health and 

11 Safety for the Semiconductor Industry 

12 Association. On behalf of the SIA, let me take 

13 this opportunity to thank you for this 

14 opportunity to testify today on the mandatory of 

15 reporting of greenhouse gases.

16 The SIA understands that the USEPA faces 

17 a mandate from Congress to develop regulations 

18 for reporting greenhouse gas emissions 

19 information. We want to work cooperatively with 

20 the Agency as we have in the past under our 

21 voluntary MOU program. We give our full support 

22 to its implementation of this mandate. 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

12

1 We also greatly appreciate EPA’s 

2 responsiveness to our comments on the original 

3 proposal and decision to defer greenhouse gas 

4 reporting regime for our industry and to engage 

5 in additional rulemaking. The SIA is now engaged 

6 in an internal process with our members to 

7 evaluate carefully the reporting rule re8 proposal. 

9 As you know, for the original proposal, 

10 SIA commissioned a survey by an independent 

11 entity, the International SEMATECH Manufacturing 

12 Initiative, with whom the USEPA itself has 

13 partnered on a mission reporting method 

14 development. That survey indicated compliance 

15 with the original proposal would have 

16 necessitated extensive operational and 

17 infrastructure changes which where technically 

18 feasible, would far exceed the $3.6 million 

19 estimate by the USEPA and instead would run into 

20 the tens of millions. Moreover, under no

21 circumstance, could those changes have occurred 

22 in the reporting timeframe specified in the 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

13

1 original proposal. The SIA has commissioned a 

2 supplemental survey by ISMI keyed to address the 

3 technical requirements and costs that would be 

4 associated with the re-proposal. We expect to 

5 have a preliminary report from ISMI on the 

6 supplemental survey by mid May. At that time, we 

7 will share those results with the Agency and 

8 engage in further dialogue. 

9 In addition to the ISMI supplemental 

10 survey, the SIA has been working with our members 

11 to analyze the re-proposal from a technical, 

12 policy and legal standpoint. We have not yet 

13 completed our analysis process, but I can 

14 highlight today several aspects of the re15 proposal that our members have identified as 

16 being of potential concern. 

17 The reporting threshold equation. The 

18 equation for semiconductor manufacture is to 

19 calculate whether or not a facility exceeds the 

20 25,000 tons of carbon dioxide equivalent 

21 reporting threshold appears flawed. The equation 

22 itself lacks a CO2e conversion step based on the 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

14

1 global warming potential of the individual gases. 

2 It also appears to constitute a potential to emit 

3 equation based on 100 percent of the 

4 manufacturing capacity factor as opposed to an 

5 actual emission calculation that should serve as 

6 a trigger for reporting obligations.

7 Process categories. The re-proposal sets 

8 out nine semiconductor manufacturing process 

9 categories and subcategories. The re-proposal 

10 would require annual reporting on both usage and 

11 mass emission information for each of these 

12 categories and subcategories on an individual gas 

13 by gas basis as well as for a tenth, nitrous 

14 oxide, other category. The SIA appreciates the 

15 re-proposal in contrast to the original would 

16 allow semi-conductor manufacturers to calculate 

17 emissions instead of requiring individual tool 

18 measurements or continuous emissions monitoring 

19 neither of which are technically or economically 

20 feasible at this time. 

21 Nevertheless, the re-proposal process22 based reporting scheme raises several potential 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

15

1 concerns. First, protection of trade secret 

2 information – information about which gases a 

3 facility uses and which processes and the amount 

4 would reveal competitively valuable trade secret 

5 information. Indeed, such details of greenhouse 

6 gas usage and emissions by process would provide 

7 those familiar with our industry specific 

8 knowledge of proprietary device designs and 

9 manufacturing process, and also effectively may 

10 reveal customer sensitive product information 

11 based on manufacture or loading. Annual 

12 production levels and/or facilities capacities 

13 also could be used by competitors to characterize 

14 manufacturing efficiencies and to influence 

15 prospective customer decisions. Under the 

16 circumstances, our members likely would have no 

17 choice but to claim much of the information that 

18 would be required under the re-proposal as 

19 confidential including the mass emission 

20 information broken down by gas and by process.

21 We understand the EPA may wish to receive 

22 some of this kind of information from our members 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

16

1 to verify their compliance. We question, 

2 however, the need of the Agency to receive it 

3 routinely especially in view of the trade secret 

4 nature of the information. 

5 CO2 equivalent conversion. The re6 proposal would appear to require gas by gas 

7 reporting of usage and emission information by 

8 process category or subcategory on a mass basis 

9 without any CO2e conversion. The SIA is concerned

10 this reporting approach in particular, the re11 proposal provides no indication of whether the 

12 EPA plans to make this information publicly 

13 available or instead will undertake to convert it 

14 to CO2e. 

15 If the EPA intends to undertake a 

16 conversion, the SIA would question what 

17 methodology and what GWP factors will get used 

18 and how the resulting numbers will get displayed 

19 and explained to the public. 

20 Compliance burden and cost. As noted 

21 above, the SIA greatly appreciates that the re22 proposal would allow for an emission factor 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

17

1 approach and also is responsive to the SIA’s 

2 suggestion in our comments on the original 

3 proposal to allow gas usage fuel factors based on 

4 cylinder-change triggers. The re-proposal, 

5 however, may end up imposing an equal or even 

6 greater burden as compared with the original 

7 proposal. 

8 In particularly, the re-proposal would 

9 require semi-conductor manufacturers to break 

10 emissions down on a gas by gas basis for each of 

11 the nine process categories plus the tenth 

12 nitrous oxide category. Moreover, the re13 proposal would mandate that such breakdown occur 

14 based on quantifiable indicators and not based on 

15 engineering judgment. This reporting scheme may 

16 result in significant compliance burdens and 

17 cost. The ISMI supplemental survey aims to 

18 assess these burdens and costs. Based on the 

19 supplemental survey results, the SIA will address 

20 whether these burdens and costs are reasonable or 

21 not in view of the USEPA’s apparent objective to 

22 reduce uncertainty.
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

18

1 Default factors. The re-proposal would 

2 not adopt the SIA’s suggested alternative in our 

3 comments to the original proposal. Under that 

4 alternative, facilities would report emissions 

5 based on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 

6 Change or the IPCC emissions assessment methods 

7 that are now being used by our industry but with 

8 several enhancements. Instead, the re-proposal 

9 envisions that the USEPA would establish its own 

10 default emission factors for each of the process 

11 categories and subcategories on an individual gas 

12 basis. The re-proposal provides little detail on 

13 how the Agency will derive these factors. 

14 We understand that the USEPA has 

15 solicited information from equipment suppliers to 

16 our industry through the Semiconductor Equipment 

17 Manufacturers International or SEMI trade 

18 association. But the process by which this 

19 solicitation occurred has not been transparent to 

20 the SIA. We were informed during the USEPA’s 

21 electronics industry sector outreach 

22 teleconference last week that all the information 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

19

1 provided by SEMI through the solicitation has 

2 been claimed as confidential and therefore is not 

3 available to us. 

4 Although the USEPA indicated in the re5 proposal that it may issue a notice of 

6 availability of data for comment on the default 

7 emission factors, it does not commit to do so and 

8 indeed suggests the agency may decide in the 

9 interest of time simply to include the factors as 

10 part of the final rule without any notice and 

11 opportunity for comment. The SIA does not 

12 believe that this approach would comport with 

13 basic administrative process mandates of the 

14 Clean Air Act and Administrative Procedures Act.

Moreover, as stated in our February 25t h 15

16 letter to the EPA, SIA would consider supporting 

17 the development in the future of process specific 

18 emission factors through a collaborative effort 

19 such as the next IPCC evaluation by working with 

20 our tool suppliers to gather more data and to 

21 share the cost of testing. This approach would 

22 provide the best path forward. Not only would it 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

20

1 provide an international collaboration and 

2 acceptance that is necessary to avoid serious 

3 damage to competitiveness of the U.S.-based 

4 semiconductor operations, but it also would 

5 ensure greater transparency and burden sharing. 

6 Indeed, the SIA continues to believe that until 

7 an international community moves beyond the 

8 current IPCC factors, a reporting rule that 

9 allows existing sources to use the IPCC Tier 2B 

10 factors would provide a robust scheme for 

11 semiconductor manufacturing, greenhouse gas 

12 emission reporting with suitable accuracy to 

13 satisfy the agency’s objectives. Under the 

14 circumstances, the burdens and cost associated 

15 with other approaches in the name of greater 

16 precision are difficult to justify, particularly 

17 given that greenhouse gas emissions from the 

18 semiconductor industry are less than 0.1 percent 

19 of the U.S. inventory of greenhouse emissions, 

20 perfluorocarbons are critical to the 

21 semiconductor manufacturing process, and that the 

22 re-proposal would impose greenhouse gas reporting 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

21

1 burdens far exceeding other regions of the world 

2 and therefore would place the domestic 

3 semiconductor industry, the country’s second 

4 leading export sector and source of approximately 

5 200,000 high-paying jobs, at a distinct 

6 competitive disadvantage.

7 Abatement technology. The re-proposal 

8 would prohibit semiconductor manufacturers from 

9 obtaining full credit for the emission reductions 

10 provided by the greenhouse gas abatement devices 

11 unless the source undertakes the following 

12 measures on an annual basis. First, 

13 certification that each abatement system has been 

14 installed and is maintained and operated in 

15 accordance with the manufacturer’s specification. 

16 Second, an accounting of each system’s up time. 

17 Third, a random sampling of three units or 20 

18 percent of the installed units whichever is 

19 greater following the EPA’s DRE protocol. 

20 The SIA is concerned that the foregoing 

21 measures would require semiconductor 

22 manufacturers to generate a large amount of 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

22

1 information on an annual basis for the hundreds 

2 of point of use abatement devices used for 

3 greenhouse gas control on individual process 

4 tools. Doing so would provide quite costly and 

5 burdensome. 

6 We acknowledge that the re-proposal would 

7 allow the use of default DREs in lieu of the 

8 foregoing and appreciate the EPA’s willingness to 

9 provide this option in contrast to the original 

10 proposal which had not provided any such option. 

11 The re-proposal’s 60 percent default DRE value, 

12 however, falls well short of the GHG control 

13 offered by our point of use devices and therefore 

14 penalizes semiconductor manufacturers who have 

15 operated voluntarily in good faith under our MOU 

16 and other greenhouse gas reduction programs to 

17 install and maintain control devices. 

18 The ISMI supplemental survey, the SIA 

19 hopes to gain a clearer picture of the cost 

20 associated with the re-proposal’s abatement 

21 requirements and looks forward to discussing the 

22 alternative approaches and a more appropriate DRE 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

23

1 value. 

2 In closing, we look forward to continuing 

3 to work with the EPA to meet the objectives of 

4 the rule. We believe that the objective can be 

5 met with an alternative reporting structure that 

6 is more closely aligned with the capabilities of 

7 our sector. Thank you.

8 MR. GUNNING: Thanks for your comments.

9 Okay. Our third speaker, I’d like to ask 

10 Peter Zalzal.

11 MR. ZALZAL: Good morning. My name is 

12 Peter Zalzal. I’m an attorney with the 

13 Environmental Defense Fund and thank you for the 

14 opportunity for giving comments today. 

15 I’m just going to touch on three brief 

16 points and they relate generally to all the 

17 fluorinated greenhouse gas rules.

18 First, I’d like to say we appreciate 

19 EPA’s action to require reporting from 

20 fluorinated greenhouse gas sources given the 

21 nature of these gases. Fluorinated greenhouse 

22 gases are atmospherically persistent and have an 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

24

1 extremely high global warming potential. In its 

2 fourth assessment report, IPCC recognized that 

3 non-CO2 gases from manufacturing – HFCs, PFCs, SF6

4 and N20 are increasing and such gases have 

5 extremely long lifetimes – thousands of years and 

6 GWP values thousands of times those of CO2

7 resulting in virtually irreversible atmospheric 

8 impacts.

9 EPA has recognized he critical nature of 

10 these gases given their potency and long 

11 atmospheric lifetimes. EPA has entered into 

12 voluntary partnerships with industry aimed at 

13 reducing fluorinated greenhouse gases. And EPA’s 

14 ozone protection regulatory programs are working 

15 to limit emissions through mandatory recycling or 

16 use restrictions. 

17 The proposed greenhouse gas reporting 

18 rule will provide EPA with indispensable data as 

19 it moves forward with these and other efforts to 

20 address high GWP gas omissions in the most 

21 effective manner.

22 Second, I’d like to talk briefly about 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

25

1 the scope of the rule. EDF applauds EPA’s 

2 inclusion of manufacturers or refurbishers of 

3 electrical equipment and importers and exporters 

4 of pre-charged equipment and closed cell phones. 

5 Inclusion in the MRR of refrigeration and air 

6 conditioning equipment that holds large banks of 

7 fluorinated gas omissions is a key step towards 

8 improving the responsible disposal and 

9 destruction of high GWP gases contained within 

10 them. 

11 Likewise, given their potentially 

12 significant greenhouse gas footprint, EDF 

13 supports the Agency’s proposal to include 

14 fluorinated greenhouse gases emitted as a 

15 byproduct of the production of CFCs and HCFCs, 

16 and fluorinated greenhouse gases emitted as a 

17 feedstock or byproduct of a transformation 

18 process. 

19 EDF also encourages EPA to include 

20 fluorinated gases that while neither reactants 

21 nor products are generated as byproducts, are 

22 intermediaries of another reaction. 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

26

1 Finally, where there are very high 

2 numbers of sources in many different locations as 

3 is the case for SF6 from electrical equipment, it 

4 may be appropriate to provide an alternative 

5 facility definition. And we look forward to 

6 providing more detailed written comments on 

7 effective approaches to address the applicability 

8 of the emissions reporting requirements for this 

9 sector. 

10 Lastly, EDF shares the Agency’s interest 

11 in accurate, reliable data and we recognize that 

12 system-wide accuracy can often be achieved 

13 through a combination of monitoring methods. We 

14 know that EPA has generally expanded the 

15 monitoring methods available to fluorinated gas 

16 facilities including proposing a refined method 

17 for estimating emissions factors from 

18 semiconductor facilities in lieu of the 2006 IPCC 

19 Tier 3 method and allowing producers of 

20 fluorinated greenhouse gases increased 

21 flexibility in using mass balance measurements to 

22 monitor their emissions. EDF encourages the 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

27

1 Agency to ensure that these revised methods do 

2 indeed provide accurate data and we look forward 

3 to providing more detailed analyses of the 

4 proposal in our written comments.

5 EDF greatly appreciates the Agency’s 

6 leadership in developing the Fluorinated 

7 Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule which will provide 

8 extremely important data.

9 Thank you again for the opportunity to 

10 testify today and we look forward to offering 

11 more detailed comments on the Agency’s proposal 

12 in our written submissions. Thanks.

13 MR. GUNNING: Thanks, Peter. I’d like to 

14 ask Dan Chartier to come up, please. 

15 MR. CHARTIER: Good morning. My name’s 

16 Dan Chartier. I’m here today representing the 

17 Edison Electric Institute or EEI as it is also 

18 known. 

19 I appreciate the opportunity to address 

20 EPA’s revisions to the greenhouse gas reporting 

21 requirements for sources of fluorinated gases 

22 specifically Subpart DD on electric transmission 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

28

1 and distribution equipment use.

2 The Edison Electric Institute is the 

3 association of U.S. shareholder-owned electric 

4 utilities. Our members serve 95 percent of the 

5 ultimate customers in the shareholder-owned 

6 segment of the industry and represent roughly 70 

7 percent of the U.S. electric power industry over 

8 all. We also have more than 70 international 

9 electric companies as affiliate members and more 

10 than 200 industry suppliers in related 

11 organizations as associate members. 

12 In addition to generating electricity, 

13 EEI’s members own and operate electric power, 

14 transmission and distributions that use a 

15 fluorinated gas, sulfur hexafluoride or SF6 for 

16 short as insulation and would be required to 

17 report SF6 emissions once this part of the 

18 mandatory reporting rule is finalized.

19 EEI provides these preliminary comments 

20 on the proposed revision now and intends to file 

21 written comments at the appropriate time. EEI 

22 notes that EPA’s initial proposal for reporting 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

29

1 SF6 emissions from electrical transmission and 

2 distribution equipment used a definition of the 

3 term “facility” that is dependent on the physical 

4 proximity of possible emission sources. This 

5 definition which makes sense for other source 

6 categories is difficult to apply to transmission 

7 and distribution systems which can span hundreds 

8 if not thousands of miles.

9 Moreover, transmission and distribution 

10 system components from the point at which 

11 electricity is generated to the point at which it 

12 is delivered to the ultimate customer, may have 

13 multiple owners or operators. For this reason, 

14 in comments filed last year in EPA’s initial 

15 proposal, EEI urged the Agency to require 

16 reporting of SF6 emissions at the corporate level 

17 consistent with the methodology employed by the 

18 voluntary SF6 emissions reduction partnership 

19 program. 

20 In comments filed last year, EEI also 

21 noted other practical concerns for using the 

22 facility approach to SF6 reporting. EEI 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

30

1 appreciates EPA’s recognition of the concerns and 

2 the Agency’s prior decision not to finalize the 

3 initial proposed rule for this source category at 

4 the end of last year. EEI also appreciates the 

5 Agency’s willingness to revisit the definition of

6 source category and the term “facility” as they 

7 relate to SF6 emissions in the current proposal.

8 In the proposed revisions, EPA does not 

9 adopt corporate level reporting for SF6 emissions 

10 and instead focuses on system-wide reporting. 

11 EEI is in the process of reviewing EPA’s proposed 

12 definition of “electric power system” and 

13 considering the implications distinguishing 

14 between electric power systems on the basis of 

15 ownership or control. EEI will address these 

16 issues in more detail in its written comments. 

17 Also at this time, EEI raises the 

18 following concerns.

19 First, there are a myriad of ownership 

20 and operational relationships for electric power 

21 systems across regions and companies. Some of 

22 these may be quite complex and not amenable to 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

31

1 reporting the system-wide level.

2 Second, given the unique definition of 

3 “facility” that EPA proposes to use for reporting 

4 emissions from only electric transmission and 

5 distribution equipment, EPA should not include 

6 this subcategory in the list of all in sources in 

7 40 CFR of Section 98 2A1. Moreover, assuming for 

8 the sake of argument that reporting is required 

9 at the electric power system level, EPA should 

10 clarify that SF6 emissions need only be reported 

11 by the appropriate electric power system and need 

12 not be included in the facility-level reports 

13 that are required by other subcategory of 

14 emission sources.

15 EPA’s proposal to hold both owners and 

16 operators of electrical power systems responsible 

17 for SF6, may lead to double counting of emissions.

18 If EPA continues with this approach, the Agency 

19 should provide guidance in how to minimize or 

20 eliminate that double counting. 

21 EEI looks forward to continuing to work 

22 with EPA and crafting workable reporting schemes 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

32

1 for SF6. And we wish to thank you for the 

2 opportunity to provide these oral comments today.

3 MR. GUNNING: Thanks, Dan. 

4 At this point, we’ve gone through the 

5 list of signed-up speakers and I’d like to ask 

6 additional folks if they would like to make 

7 comments this morning. Anybody. Everybody’s 

8 here to listen. That’s good. 

9 Okay, so in lieu of that, we are open for 

10 comment until noon today. What I’d like to do at 

11 this point is take a 10 minute break and see if 

12 there are additional folks after that break that 

13 are interested in commenting. And then we will 

14 be here and available through noon today if there 

15 are additional comments that folks would like to 

16 provide. So, we’ll take a ten-minute break and 

17 then we’ll touch back in to see if there’s more 

18 people that want to address.

19 [Break.]

20 MR. GUNNING: Okay, everyone. If I could 

21 reengage for a moment. I want to check in now to 

22 see if there are – I know a couple of people are 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

33

1 walking in and out – additional individuals that 

2 would like to make comments this morning at this 

3 point. No. Okay. 

4 What I’ll do at this time is I am going 

5 to be transitioning the hearing over to Debbie 

6 Ottinger. We will have – we will be here armed 

7 and ready to listen to your comments through 

8 approximately noon today. 

9 And if at this point moving forward if 

10 there are individuals that would like to make 

11 comments, I’d ask that you just please come up 

12 and notify Debbie of your desire to do so and we 

13 will open up the mike again for your thoughts. 

14 So at this time, we’ll break indefinitely until 

15 someone approaches us with additional comments. 

16 And for those of you here today and before I 

17 leave, I just want to thank everybody for coming. 

18 These subparts are really important, we believe, 

19 to a full, robust, successful mandatory reporting 

20 rule and program. And I’d like to thank you all 

21 for the thoughts that you offered today. And I 

22 also encourage you and emphasize that we have an 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

34

1 open door policy, and these are in many cases, 

2 re-proposals. We do our best to make sure that 

3 we reflect comments and respond to comments 

4 diligently to make our rule the most efficient 

5 and effective it possibly can be. So in the 

6 coming weeks, days, if individuals would like to 

7 meet with us to discuss your perspectives and 

8 thoughts further, we welcome that. We believe 

9 that will make a more effective rule in the end. 

10 So I encourage you to contact me or Debbie or 

11 Kirsten or Sally or any of the EPA staff involved 

12 in these rulemakings. We welcome that and we 

13 appreciate that and it’ll make our jobs easier 

14 and more effective eventually. 

15 So thank you for those who came this 

16 morning. We will take a pause now. And again, 

17 to reiterate, if you have additional comments 

18 you’d like to offer, please approach Debbie and 

19 we’ll open up the floor again for additional 

20 commenters. Thank you.

21 [Waiting – 9:51 to 11:54.]

22 MS. SIBOLD: Hello. This Katherine 
OLENDER REPORTING, INC.

1100 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 810, Washington, D.C. 20036

Washington: (202) 898-1108 / Baltimore: (410) 752-3376

Toll Free: (888) 445-3376

35

1 Sibold. It is 11:54 in the morning. We have 

2 completed this public hearing for the additional 

3 sources of F-gases. There have been no persons 

4 in the room for roughly the last two-plus hours, 

5 so we are going to go ahead and close this public

6 hearing at this time. 

7 [Whereupon, at 11:55 a.m., the Public 

8 Hearing concluded.]