Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 57669 

and center mounting rods, and rod ends. If 

any corrosion is found during any inspection, 

before further flight, do the actions required 

by paragraphs (f)(1)(i), (f)(1)(ii), and (f)(1)(iii) 

of this AD, as applicable. Do all actions 

required by this paragraph in accordance 

with the Accomplishment Instructions of 

EMBRAER Service Bulletin 120–49–0023, 

Revision 01, dated June 30, 2008. 

(i) If light corrosion (characterized by 

discoloration or pitting) is found on a 

mounting rod, remove the corrosion and 

apply an anticorrosive treatment. 

(ii) If moderate corrosion (characterized by 

surface blistering or evidence of scaling and 

flaking), or heavy corrosion (characterized by 

severe blistering exfoliation, scaling and 

flaking) is found, replace the affected 

mounting rod with a new mounting rod 

having the same part number. 

(iii) If any corrosion is detected on the rod 

ends, remove the corrosion and apply an 

anticorrosive treatment. 

(2) Accomplishing of the inspection and 

corrective actions required by paragraph 

(f)(1) of this AD before the effective date of 

this AD in accordance with EMBRAER 

Service Bulletin 120–49–0023, dated April 

18, 2008, is acceptable for compliance with 

the corresponding requirements of paragraph 

(f)(1) of this AD. 

(3) For mounting rods with moderate or 

heavy corrosion, submit a report of the 

positive findings (including level of 

corrosion such as moderate or heavy; 

guidance on corrosion can be found in 

Chapter 51–11–01 of the EMBRAER 

Corrosion Prevention Manual) of the 

inspection required by paragraph (f)(1) of this 

AD to Mr. Antonio Claret—Customer Support 

Group, Embraer Aircraft Holding, Inc, 276 

S.W 34th Street Fort Lauderdale, FL 33315— 

USA; telephone (954) 359–3826; e-mail 

structure@embraer.com.br; at the applicable 

time specified in paragraph (f)(3)(i) or 

(f)(3)(ii) of this AD. The report must include 

the inspection results, a description of any 

discrepancies found, the airplane serial 

number, and the number of landings and 

flight hours on the airplane. 

(i) If the inspection was done on or after 

the effective date of this AD: Submit the 

report within 30 days after the inspection. 

(ii) If the inspection was accomplished 

prior to the effective date of this AD: Submit 

the report within 30 days after the effective 

date of this AD. 

FAA AD Differences 

Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI 

and/or service information as follows: 

(1) Although Brazilian Airworthiness 

Directive 2008–08–01, dated October 21, 

2008, does not include a reporting 

requirement, the service bulletin identified in 

paragraph (f)(1) of this AD does specify 

reporting findings to EMBRAER. This AD 

requires that operators report the results of 

the inspections to EMBRAER because the 

required inspection report will help 

determine the extent of the corrosion in the 

affected fleet, from which we will determine 

if further corrective action is warranted. This 

difference has been coordinated with ANAC. 

(2) Brazilian Airworthiness Directive 2008– 

08–01, dated October 21, 2008, allows 

replacement of the affected APU mounting 

rods by ‘‘new ones bearing a new P/N [part 

number] approved by ANAC [Ageˆncia 

Nacional de Aviac ̧a ̃o Civil].’’ However, 

paragraph (f)(1)(ii) of this AD requires 

replacing the affected mounting rod only 

with a new mounting rod having the same 

part number. Operators may request approval 

of an alternative method of compliance to 

install a new part number in accordance with 

the procedures specified in paragraph (g)(1) 

of this AD. This difference has been 

coordinated with ANAC. 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(g) The following provisions also apply to 

this AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, International 

Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, FAA, has the authority to 

approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

Send information to ATTN: Todd Thompson, 

Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, 

ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425) 

227–1175; fax (425) 227–1149. Before using 

any approved AMOC on any airplane to 

which the AMOC applies, notify your 

principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or 

principal avionics inspector (PAI), as 

appropriate, or lacking a principal inspector, 

your local Flight Standards District Office. 

The AMOC approval letter must specifically 

reference this AD. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

(3) Reporting Requirements: For any 

reporting requirement in this AD, under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has 

approved the information collection 

requirements and has assigned OMB Control 

Number 2120–0056. 

(4) Special Flight Permits: Special flight 

permits may be issued in accordance with 

sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal 

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and 

21.199) to operate the airplane to a location 

where the airplane can be modified (if the 

operator elects to do so), except if two or 

more center mounting rods or rod ends are 

heavily corroded or broken, a special flight 

permit is not permitted. 

Related Information 

(h) Refer to MCAI Brazilian Airworthiness 

Directive 2008–08–01, dated October 21, 

2008; and EMBRAER Service Bulletin 120– 

49–0023, Revision 01, dated June 30, 2008; 

for related information. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(i) You must use EMBRAER Service 

Bulletin 120–49–0023, Revision 01, dated 

June 30, 2008, to do the actions required by 

this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference of 

this service information under 5 U.S.C. 

552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Empresa Brasileira de 

Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER), Technical 

Publications Section (PC 060), Av. Brigadeiro 

Faria Lima, 2170–Putim–12227–901 Sa ̃o Jose 

dos Campos–SP–BRASIL; telephone +55 12 

3927–5852 or +55 12 3309–0732; fax +55 12 

3927–7546; e-mail distrib@embraer.com.br; 

Internet http://www.flyembraer.com. 

(3) You may review copies of the service 

information at the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, call 

425–227–1221. 

(4) You may also review copies of the 

service information that is incorporated by 

reference at the National Archives and 

Records Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of this 

material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, or go 

to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/ 

code_of_federal_regulations/ 

ibr_locations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 

30, 2010. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–22849 Filed 9–21–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 98 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0925; FRL–9204–7] 

RIN 2060–AQ02 

Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse 

Gases 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action amends the Final 

Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse 

Gases Rule to require reporters subject 

to the rule to provide: The name, 

address, and percentage ownership of 

their U.S. parent company(s); their 

primary North American Industry 

Classification System code(s) as well as 

all additional applicable North 

American Industry Classification 

System code(s); and an indication of 

whether or not any of their reported 

emissions are from a cogeneration unit. 

This final action also corrects an 

editorial error in revisions made to the 

General Provisions published earlier 

this year. 

DATES: The final rule is effective on 

November 22, 2010. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
57670 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0925. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the http://www.regulations.gov Web 

site. Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., confidential business information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically through 

http://www.regulations.gov or in hard 

copy at EPA’s Docket Center, Public 

Reading Room, EPA West Building, 

Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, 

NW., Washington, DC 20004. This 

Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays. The telephone 

number for the Public Reading Room is 

(202) 566–1744, and the telephone 

number for the Air Docket is (202) 566– 

1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical information and 

implementation materials, please go to 

the Web site http://www.epa.gov/ 

climatechange/emissions/ 

ghgrulemaking.html. To submit a 

question, select Rule Help Center, 

followed by Contact Us. You may also 

contact Carole Cook, Climate Change 

Division, Office of Atmospheric 

Programs (MC–6207J), Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; 

telephone number: (202) 343–9263; fax 

number: (202) 343–2342; e-mail address: 

GHGMRR@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated 

Entities. This amendment to 40 CFR part 

98 affects facilities that are direct 

emitters of GHGs, and suppliers of fuels 

and industrial gases that are already 

subject to the rule. Regulated categories 

and entities include those listed in 

Table 1 of this preamble. 

TABLE 1—EXAMPLES OF REGULATED ENTITIES BY CATEGORY

Category NAICS Code Examples of regulated entities 

General Stationary Fuel Combustion 

Sources.

................................ Facilities operating boilers, process heaters, incinerators, turbines, and internal 

combustion engines: 

211 Extractors of crude petroleum and natural gas. 

321 Manufacturers of lumber and wood products. 

322 Pulp and paper mills. 

325 Chemical manufacturers. 

324 Petroleum refineries and manufacturers of coal products. 

316, 326, 339 Manufacturers of rubber and miscellaneous plastic products. 

331 Steel works, blast furnaces. 

332 Electroplating, plating, polishing, anodizing, and coloring. 

336 Manufacturers of motor vehicle parts and accessories. 

221 Electric, gas, and sanitary services. 

622 Health services. 

611 Educational services. 

325193 Ethyl alcohol manufacturing facilities. 

Electricity Generation ............................. 221112 Fossil-fuel fired electric generating units, including units owned by Federal and 

municipal governments and units located in Indian Country. 

Adipic Acid Production ........................... 325199 Adipic acid manufacturing facilities. 

Aluminum Production ............................. 331312 Primary Aluminum production facilities. 

Ammonia Manufacturing ........................ 325311 Anhydrous and aqueous ammonia manufacturing facilities. 

Cement Production ................................ 327310 Portland Cement manufacturing plants. 

Ferroalloy Production ............................. 331112 Ferroalloys manufacturing facilities. 

Glass Production .................................... 327211 Flat glass manufacturing facilities. 

327213 Glass container manufacturing facilities. 

327212 Other pressed and blown glass and glassware manufacturing facilities. 

HCFC–22 Production and HFC–23 Destruction.325120 Chlorodifluoromethane manufacturing facilities. 

Hydrogen Production ............................. 325120 Hydrogen manufacturing facilities. 

Iron and Steel Production ...................... 331111 Integrated iron and steel mills, steel companies, sinter plants, blast furnaces, 

basic oxygen process furnace shops. 

Lead Production ..................................... 331419 Primary lead smelting and refining facilities. 

............................................................ 331492 Secondary lead smelting and refining facilities. 

Lime Production ..................................... 327410 Calcium oxide, calcium hydroxide, dolomitic hydrates manufacturing facilities. 

Magnesium Production .......................... 331419 Primary refiners of nonferrous metals by electrolytic methods. 

331492 Secondary magnesium processing plants. 

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

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

325199 Acrylonitrile, ethylene oxide, methanol manufacturing facilities. 

325110 Ethylene manufacturing facilities. 

325182 Carbon black manufacturing facilities. 

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

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

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

322121 Paper mills. 

322130 Paperboard mills. 

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

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

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

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

Underground Coal Mines ....................... 212113 Underground anthracite coal mining operations. 

212112 Underground bituminous coal mining operations. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 57671 

TABLE 1—EXAMPLES OF REGULATED ENTITIES BY CATEGORY—Continued 

Category NAICS Code Examples of regulated entities 

Zinc Production ...................................... 331419 Primary zinc refining facilities. 

331492 Zinc dust reclaiming facilities, recovering from scrap and/or alloying purchased 

metals. 

Municipal Solid Waste Landfills ............. 562212 Solid waste landfills. 

221320 Sewage treatment facilities. 

Industrial Waste Landfills ....................... 562212 Solid waste landfills. 

322110 Pulp mills. 

322121 Paper mills. 

322122 Newsprint mills. 

322130 Paperboard mills. 

311611 Meat processing facilities. 

311411 Frozen fruit, juice, and vegetable manufacturing facilities. 

311421 Fruit and vegetable canning facilities. 

221320 Sewage treatment facilities. 

Industrial Wastewater Treatment ........... 562212 Solid waste landfills. 

322110 Pulp mills. 

322121 Paper mills. 

322122 Newsprint mills. 

322130 Paperboard mills. 

311611 Meat processing facilities. 

311411 Frozen fruit, juice, and vegetable manufacturing facilities. 

311421 Fruit and vegetable canning facilities. 

221320 Sewage treatment facilities. 

325193 Ethyl alcohol manufacturing facilities. 

Manure Management a ........................... 112111 Beef cattle feedlots. 

112120 Dairy cattle and milk production facilities. 

112210 Hog and pig farms. 

112310 Chicken egg production facilities. 

112330 Turkey Production. 

112320 Broilers and Other Meat type Chicken Production. 

Suppliers of Coal Based Liquids Fuels .. 211111 Coal liquefaction at mine sites. 

Suppliers of Petroleum Products ........... 324110 Petroleum refineries. 

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

211112 Natural gas liquid extraction facilities. 

Suppliers of Industrial GHGs ................. 325120 Industrial gas manufacturing facilities. 

Suppliers of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) ........ 325120 Industrial gas manufacturing facilities. 

aEPA will not be implementing subpart JJ of the Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule using funds provided in its FY2010 appropriations due to a 

Congressional restriction prohibiting the expenditure of funds for this purpose. 

Table 1 of this preamble is not 

intended to be exhaustive, but rather 

provides a guide for readers regarding 

entities likely to be affected by this 

action. Table 1 of this preamble lists the 

types of entities that may be reporting 

under 40 CFR part 98 and, therefore, 

may be affected by this action. However, 

other types of entities not listed in the 

table could also be subject to reporting 

requirements. To determine whether an 

entity is affected by this action, you 

should carefully examine the 

applicability criteria found in 40 CFR 

part 98, subpart A. EPA has also 

proposed reporting requirements for 

several other source categories (rule 

subparts). If these subparts are finalized, 

entities subject to them would be also 

subject to this action starting with their 

first reports. The following subparts 

have been proposed, but not yet 

finalized, by EPA: 

• 40 CFR part 98, subpart I 

(Electronics Manufacturing) (75 FR 

18652, April 12, 2010); 

• 40 CFR part 98, subpart L 

(Fluorinated Gas Production) (75 FR 

18652, April 12, 2010); 

• 40 CFR part 98, subpart W 

(Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems) 

(75 FR 18608, April 12, 2010); 

• 40 CFR part 98, subpart DD (Electric 

Transmission and Distribution 

Equipment Use) (75 FR 18652, April 12, 

2010); 

• 40 CFR part 98, subpart QQ 

(Imports and Exports of Fluorinated 

GHGs Inside Pre-charged Equipment 

and Closed-cell Foams (75 FR 18652, 

April 12, 2010); 

• 40 CFR part 98, subpart RR 

(Injection and Geologic Sequestration of 

Carbon Dioxide (75 FR 18576, April 12, 

2010); and 

• 40 CFR part 98, subpart SS 

(Electrical Equipment Manufacture or 

Refurbishment) (75 FR 18652, April 12, 

2010). 

If you have questions regarding the 

applicability of this action to a 

particular entity, consult the Web site or 

the person listed in the preceding FOR

FURTHER GENERAL INFORMATION CONTACT

section. 

Judicial Review 

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

judicial review of this final rule is 

available only by filing a petition for 

review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for 

the District of Columbia Circuit by 

November 22, 2010. Note, under CAA 

section 307(b)(2), the requirements 

established by this final rule may not be 

challenged separately in any civil or 

criminal proceedings brought by EPA to 

enforce these requirements. 

Acronyms and Abbreviations 

The following acronyms and 

abbreviations are used in this document: 

CAA Clean Air Act 

CBI confidential business information 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

CO2 carbon dioxide 

CO2e CO2-equivalent 

CUSIP Committee on Uniform Security 

Identification Procedures 

DUNS Data Universal Numbering System 

EIA Economic Impact Analysis 

EO Executive Order 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
57672 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

1 GHGRP refers to the implementation of 40 CFR 

part 98. 

2Because mobile sources are not covered under 

40 CFR part 98, this rule does not apply to them. 

3 If additional categories are finalized in 40 CFR 

part 98, then this rule applies to those categories as 

well. 

4EPA will not be implementing subpart JJ of the 

Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule using funds 

provided in its FY2010 appropriations due to a 

Congressional restriction prohibiting the 

expenditure of funds for this purpose. 

5Responses to major comments can be found in 

the preamble to the final Part 98 (74 FR 56260). 

Responses to additional comments can be found in 

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

FEIN Federal Employer Identification 

Numbers 

GHG greenhouse gas 

GHGRP Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program 

HCFC hydrochlorofluorocarbon 

HFC hydrofluorocarbon 

ICR Information Collection Request 

LDC Local Distribution Company 

NAICS North American Industry 

Classification System 

NTTAA National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 

OMB Office of Management and Budget 

SBREFA Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act 

SEC Securities and Exchange Commission 

TRI Toxics Release Inventory 

UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

U.S. United States 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

A. Background on the Final Rule 

B. Summary of the Final Rule 

C. Legal Authority 

D. Relationship to Other Programs 

II. The Final Rule and Reponses to Public 

Comments 

A. U.S. Parent Company 

B. NAICS Code(s) 

C. Cogeneration 

D. Frequency of Reporting 

E. Applicability of the Reporting 

Requirements 

F. Miscellaneous Public Comments and 

Responses 

G. Correction to Subpart A 

III. Economic Impacts of the Final Rule 

A. How were compliance costs estimated? 

B. What are the costs of the rule? 

C. What are the economic impacts of the 

rule? 

D. What are the impacts of the rule on 

small businesses? 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

to Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

K. Congressional Review Act 

I. Background 

A. Background on the Final Rule 

On April 12, 2010, EPA proposed this 

rule amending 40 CFR part 98, which 

provides the regulatory framework for 

the GHG Reporting Program (GHGRP).1

The GHGRP requires the reporting of 

greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and 

other relevant information from certain 

source categories in the United States 

(U.S). The GHGRP, which became 

effective December 29, 2009, includes 

reporting requirements for facilities that 

emit GHGs (‘‘facilities’’) and for 

suppliers of fuels and industrial gases 

(‘‘suppliers’’). Facilities and suppliers 

that meet the applicability criteria in 40 

CFR part 98, subpart A (‘‘regulated 

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

annual GHG reports in accordance with 

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

more detailed background information 

on the GHGRP, see the preamble to the 

final rule that established the program 

(74 FR 56260, October 30, 2009). 

This rule amends 40 CFR part 98 to 

include new requirements for reporters 

to provide information on their U.S. 

parent company(s), on their primary and 

additional applicable North American 

Industry Classification System (NAICS) 

code(s), and on whether any of their 

reported emissions are from a 

cogeneration unit (also called combined 

heat and power). Facilities and 

suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 98 must 

provide this additional information in 

their annual reports. This action also 

amends 40 CFR part 98, subpart A to 

correct a drafting error in the revisions 

to 40 CFR 98.2(a)(2) published on July 

12, 2010 (75 FR 39758). 

This preamble is divided into four 

sections. The first section of the 

preamble provides background and an 

overview of the final rule, discusses 

EPA’s legal authority under the Clean 

Air Act (CAA) for collecting the 

additional information and summarizes 

the relationship between this 

information and the information already 

collected by other programs. The second 

section of the preamble describes the 

new reporting requirements finalized by 

this action, describes major changes 

since proposal, discusses public 

comments and EPA responses, and 

describes the revisions made to 40 CFR 

98.2(a)(2) to correct the editorial error 

published on July 12, 2010. The third 

section of the preamble provides a 

summary of the impacts and costs of the 

final rule and discusses comments on 

the regulatory impacts analyses. The 

fourth and final section of the preamble 

discusses the various statutory and 

executive order requirements applicable 

to the final rule. 

B. Summary of the Final Rule 

This action amends 40 CFR part 98 by 

adding several data elements to the list 

specified in 40 CFR 98.3. These data 

elements must be included in the 

annual GHG reports that facilities and 

suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 98 are 

required to submit. Specifically, this 

rule requires each reporter to (1) Provide 

the names and physical addresses of all 

of its U.S. parent companies and their 

respective percentages of ownership; (2) 

provide its primary NAICS code(s) and 

all additional applicable NAICS code(s); 

and (3) indicate whether any of its 

reported emissions are from a 

cogeneration unit located at the facility. 

This rule applies to all facilities and 

suppliers required to report under 40 

CFR part 98, including those covered by 

subparts published on October 30, 2009 

(74 FR 56260) and on July 12, 2010 (75 

FR 39736).3 Therefore, all facilities and 

suppliers that meet the applicability 

criteria in 40 CFR part 98, subpart A are 

required to report the additional data 

elements included in this rule.4

C. Legal Authority 

EPA is finalizing this rule under the 

existing authority provided in CAA 

section 114. As noted in the preamble 

to the Final Rule for Mandatory 

Reporting of GHGs (Part 98), CAA 

section 114 provides EPA with broad 

authority to require the information 

mandated by this final rule because 

such information will inform EPA’s 

implementation of various CAA 

provisions (74 FR 66264). Under CAA 

section 114(a)(1), the Administrator may 

require emission sources, persons 

subject to the CAA, manufacturers of 

emission control or process equipment, 

or persons whom the Administrator 

believes may have necessary 

information, to monitor and report 

emissions and to provide such other 

information as the Administrator 

requests for the purposes of carrying out 

any provision of the CAA (except for a 

provision of title II with respect to 

motor vehicles). 

As discussed in greater detail in 

Sections I.C and II.Q of the preamble to 

the final Part 98 rule and in the 

response to comments for 40 CFR part 

98,5 EPA may gather information for a 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 57673 

volumes 1 through 42 of the response to comments 

document entitled ‘‘Mandatory Greenhouse Gas 

Reporting Rule: EPA’s Response to Public 

Comments’’ in docket EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508 

(see http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/ 

home.html#docketDetail?R=EPA-HQ-OAR-2008- 

0508). 

6For example, Climate Leaders, Combined Heat 

and Power Partnership, and Energy Star. 

7For purposes of TRI reporting, a reporter’s 

parent company is defined as the highest-level 

company located in the U.S. that directly owns at 

least 50 percent of the voting stock of the company. 

When a facility is owned by more than one 

company and none of the owners directly owns 50 

percent or more of the voting stock, the facility 

reports the name of either the facility operator or 

the owner with the largest ownership interest in the 

facility as its U.S. parent company. (Toxic Chemical 

Release Inventory Reporting Forms and 

Instructions, EPA 260–R–09–006, October 2009. 

page 34). 

8The Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) 

is a unique 9-digit numerical identifier used to 

identify individual business entities in databases 

maintained by Dun & Bradstreet. 

9 GHGRP refers to the implementation of 40 CFR 

part 98. 

10North American Industry Classification System 

(NAICS) code(s) are defined as the six-digit code(s) 

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

at a facility or supplier as listed in the Federal 

Register and defined in ‘‘North American Industrial 

Classification System Manual 2007,’’ available from 

the U.S. Department of Commerce, National 

Technical Information Service. A reporter’s primary 

NAICS code is the NAICS code that most accurately 

describes the reporter’s primary product/activity/ 

service based on revenue. Additional NAICS codes 

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

facility that are not related to the principal source 

of revenue. 

variety of purposes, including for the 

purpose of assisting in the development 

of emissions standards under CAA 

section 111, determining compliance 

with implementation plans or 

standards, or more broadly for ‘‘carrying 

out any provision’’ of the CAA. 

In particular, CAA section 103 

authorizes EPA to establish a national 

research and development program, 

including nonregulatory approaches and 

technologies, for the prevention and 

control of air pollution, including 

GHGs. The data collected under this 

final rule would be immediately 

available to EPA and could inform 

EPA’s implementation of CAA section 

103(g) regarding improvements in 

sector-based nonregulatory strategies 

and technologies for preventing or 

reducing air pollutants. 

The data collected through this final 

rule would be immediately available to 

EPA and could be used for the purposes 

of providing additional information to 

support more effective research and 

develop actions to address GHG 

emissions. For example, corporate 

parent and NAICS data would assist 

EPA in developing and improving 

emission inventories, as well as 

characterizing emissions data in several 

different ways. A more detailed 

understanding of the sources and 

operational categories of GHG emissions 

could lead to improvements in air 

pollution emissions information that is 

relied upon to develop effective control 

strategies. For example, EPA could use 

the NAICS code information gathered by 

this rule to compare results both within 

industries and across industry sectors. 

Finally, the information gathered 

through this rule will be immediately 

available to enhance EPA’s 

implementation of various 

nonregulatory programs aimed at 

encouraging voluntary reductions of 

GHG emissions. Under the authority of 

CAA section 103, EPA has launched a 

variety of nonregulatory programs 

aimed at reducing emissions of GHGs.6

The additional data will assist EPA by 

providing more detailed information on 

possible sources, and facility operations 

within industrial sectors for EPA to 

work with in the context of these 

programs. 

Given the broad scope of CAA section 

114, it is appropriate for EPA to gather 

the information required by this final 

rule because such information is 

relevant to EPA’s implementation of a 

wide variety of CAA provisions and the 

burden of submitting such information 

is low. 

D. Relationship to Other Programs 

EPA investigated other Federal and 

non-Federal reporting programs that 

collect information similar to the 

information that EPA will collect under 

this rule to determine if any existing 

sources of information met all EPA’s 

objectives. These objectives included: 

Identifying each reporter’s highest-level 

U.S. parent company(s); identifying 

each reporter’s primary and any 

additional applicable NAICS codes; 

identifying facilities using cogeneration; 

covering all reporters subject to 40 CFR 

part 98; collecting data annually; and 

having the information available to EPA. 

This section of the preamble 

summarizes EPA’s findings from our 

review of other programs. For additional 

information on reporting requirements 

for these data elements in existing 

Federal and non-Federal programs, 

please see Section I.D of the proposal 

preamble (75 FR 18455, April 12, 2010) 

and the following memoranda ‘‘Review 

of Non-Federal Existing Greenhouse Gas 

Reporting Programs Requiring Reporting 

of Parent Company Ownership’’ and 

‘‘Summary of Existing State Greenhouse 

Gas Reporting Programs’’ located in 

Docket EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0925. 

1. EPA and Other Federal Data 

Collection Programs 

Federal voluntary programs, such as 

Climate Leaders and U.S. Department of 

Energy’s Voluntary Reporting of 

Greenhouse Gases Program, collect 

some data elements (such as data related 

to NAICS codes) that are similar to the 

data that EPA will collect under this 

rule. However, none of the voluntary 

programs collect data from all of the 

facilities and suppliers subject to 40 

CFR part 98. In addition, the voluntary 

programs that collect these data do not 

use the same definitions for data 

elements. 

U.S. Parent Company: 

Currently, three EPA programs collect 

parent company information: The 

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) under 

Section 313 of the Emergency Planning 

and Community Right-to-Know Act; 

Risk Management Plans under CAA 

section 212(r); and the Inventory Update 

Rule under the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA). Of these three 

programs, TRI is the only one that 

requires reporters to submit information 

on their highest-level U.S. parent 

company.7 TRI requires reporters to 

report the name of their one parent 

company with the largest ownership 

interest in the facility. TRI also requires 

the parent company’s Dun & Bradstreet 

Data Universal Numbering System 

(DUNS) 8 identifier to be reported 

annually. This amendment to 40 CFR 

part 98 differs from TRI parent company 

reporting requirements in that it 

requires reporting of: (1) All parent 

companies, rather than just one parent 

company; (2) the physical address of 

each parent company, but not the DUNS 

identifier; and (3) the percentage of 

ownership interest for each parent 

company. EPA estimates that 

approximately two-thirds of the 

reporters subject to 40 CFR part 98 are 

also required to report to TRI. 

Several EPA programs under the 

CAA, including the GHGRP,9 require 

reporters to identify the ‘‘owner or 

operator’’ of each affected facility. 

Although in some cases, the owner or 

operator is also the highest-level U.S. 

parent company, the information 

currently collected under the majority of 

CAA programs is not designed to 

specifically identify the highest-level 

U.S. parent company, because that 

information is not necessary to 

determine compliance with particular 

regulatory requirements. 

Primary and Other NAICS Codes: 

The final rule also requires facilities 

and suppliers reporting under 40 CFR 

part 98 to report their primary and all 

additional applicable NAICS codes.10 In 

the large majority of cases, facilities and 

suppliers will submit a single NAICS 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
57674 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

11List of Programs Collecting NAICS: AIR Facility 

System (AFS); Facility Response Plan (FRP); 

Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS); 

National Emissions Inventory (NEI); National 

Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES); 

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 

Information (RCRAInfo); Risk Management Plan 

(RMP); and Toxics Release Inventory System 

(TRIS). 

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

13Energy Information Agency-860, Annual 

Electric Generator Report http://www.eia.doe.gov/ 

cneaf/electricity/page/eia860.html and, Energy 

Information Agency-861, Annual Electric Power 

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

electricity/page/eia861.html. 

code. However, infrequently a facility/ 

supplier may have two distinct 

products/activities/services providing 

comparable revenue. In these cases the 

facility/supplier may also report a 

second primary NAICS code. Among all 

EPA programs, only TRI requires 

reporters to submit primary NAICS 

codes as well as other relevant NAICS 

codes. As noted above, EPA estimates 

that approximately two-thirds of the 

reporters required to report under the 

GHGRP are also required to report to 

TRI. 

EPA collects some NAICS code 

information through routine compliance 

reporting in multiple programs,11 but 

those programs either do not require 

primary and other NAICS codes be 

designated as such, or they do not 

define a primary NAICS code as it is 

defined in this rule. In addition, none of 

the compliance databases provide 

complete coverage of the facilities and 

suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 98. 

Cogeneration: 

There are currently no EPA programs 

that require facilities or suppliers to 

identify and report the use of 

cogeneration units located at the 

facility. EPA’s Combined Heat and 

Power Partnership, a voluntary program, 

requires that partners agree to provide 

data on existing cogeneration projects to 

help EPA determine climate benefits.12

However, this is a voluntary program 

and does not provide coverage of all 

cogeneration units. The Energy 

Information Administration collects 

information on cogeneration from utility 

and non-utility power generators greater 

than 1 megawatt,13 but does not collect 

this information from all facilities and 

suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 98. 

2. Non-Federal Data Collection 

Programs 

EPA reviewed State and other 

reporting initiatives or protocols to 

determine whether they contain 

information on U.S. parent companies, 

NAICS code(s), or cogeneration that is 

comparable in terms of coverage (of 

facilities and suppliers), and whether 

the specific information collected is 

comparable in data quality and 

timeliness to that required under this 

rule. EPA also considered whether the 

Agency had access to and could itself 

release the data collected under these 

programs. 

In general, the State and voluntary 

initiatives do not collect information on 

U.S. parent company, NAICS code(s), or 

cogeneration that is comparable to that 

required under this final rule regarding 

coverage (of facilities and suppliers), 

specific information collected, and data 

quality and timeliness. For additional 

information on the collection of parent 

company, NAICS codes, and 

cogeneration information by States, and 

other programs or initiatives, please see 

Section I.D. of the proposal preamble 

(75 FR 18455) and the following 

memoranda ‘‘Review of Non-Federal 

Existing Greenhouse Gas Reporting 

Programs Requiring Reporting of Parent 

Company Ownership’’ and ‘‘Summary of 

Existing State Greenhouse Gas 

Reporting Programs,’’ located in Docket 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0925. 

II. The Final Rule and Reponses to 

Public Comments 

This section of the preamble explains 

the requirements for the final rule, 

describes the major changes to the 

proposed rule, and summarizes the 

public comments and responses. 

A. U.S. Parent Company 

In the proposed rule published on 

April 12, 2010 (75 FR 18455), EPA 

defined United States parent 

company(s) as the highest-level United 

States company(s) with an ownership 

interest in the reporting entity as of 

December 31 of the reporting year. 

Although the proposed rule language 

included the requirements for only one 

option, EPA proposed two options in 

the preamble for reporting U.S. parent 

company information. As proposed, 

Option 1 would require all facilities and 

suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 98 to 

provide the legal name and physical 

address of their highest-level U.S. 

parent company. Reporters would then 

select the appropriate ownership status 

from a list of three types of ownership: 

‘‘Single ownership’’ for entities owned by a 

single company that is itself not owned by 

another company. 

‘‘Wholly owned’’ for entities owned by a 

single company that is itself owned by 

another company. 

‘‘Multiple ownership’’ for entities owned by 

more than one company). 

Alternatively, in the proposed Option 

2, reporters would provide the names 

and physical addresses of all of their 

U.S. parent companies and their 

respective percentages of ownership. 

1. Summary of U.S. Parent Company 

Reporting Requirements 

After considering all the comments 

received, EPA has selected Option 2. 

Option 2 requires reporters to report the 

name(s) and physical address(es) of all 

of their U.S. parent companies and their 

respective percentages of ownership. 

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

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

company(s) with an ownership interest 

in the reporting entity as of December 

31 of the year for which data are being 

reported. The physical address of a U.S. 

parent company is defined as the street 

address, city, state and zip code of the 

U.S. parent company’s physical 

location. Table 2 of this preamble 

provides instructions for how facilities 

or suppliers should report based on 

various ownership structures. 

TABLE 2—INSTRUCTIONS FOR REPORTING U.S. PARENT COMPANY(IES) 

Reporting scenario How to report U.S. parent company 

The reporting entity is entirely owned by a single U.S. company that is 

not owned by any other company (e.g., it is not a subsidiary or division of another company).

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

parent company and report 100 percent ownership. 

The reporting entity is entirely owned by a single U.S. company which 

is, itself, owned by another company (e.g., it is a division or subsidiary of a higher-level company).

Provide the legal name and physical address of the highest-level company in the ownership hierarchy as the U.S. parent company and report 100 percent ownership. 

The reporting entity is owned by more than one U.S. company (e.g., 

company A owns 40 percent, company B owns 35 percent, and company C owns 25 percent).

Provide the legal names and physical addresses of all of the highestlevel companies with an ownership interest as U.S. parent companies, and report the percent ownership of each company. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 57675 

14Federally owned facilities are not required to 

report percent ownership because all federally 

owned facilities are 100 percent owned by the 

Federal government. Additionally, the highest-level 

U.S. ‘‘parent’’ for federally owned facilities is the 

U.S. Government, and a physical address is not 

required to establish a unique identity for the U.S. 

Government. 

TABLE 2—INSTRUCTIONS FOR REPORTING U.S. PARENT COMPANY(IES)—Continued 

Reporting scenario How to report U.S. parent company 

The reporting entity is entirely owned by a foreign company .................. Provide the legal name and physical address of the foreign company’s 

highest-level company based in the U.S. as the U.S. parent company and report 100 percent ownership. 

The reporting entity is partially owned by a foreign company and partially owned by one or more U.S. companies.Provide the legal name and physical address of the foreign entity’s 

highest-level company based in the U.S., along with the legal names 

and physical addresses of the other U.S. parent companies, and report the percent ownership of each company. 

The reporting entity is owned by a joint venture or cooperative ............. The joint venture or cooperative is its own U.S. parent company. Provide the joint venture or cooperative’s legal name and physical address as the U.S. parent company and report 100 percent ownership. 

The reporting entity is a federally owned facility ...................................... Enter U.S. Government, and do not report physical address or percent 

ownership.14

2. Summary of Major Changes Since 

Proposal 

There are no major changes to the 

proposed rule for U.S. parent company 

reporting requirements for Option 2. 

That option requires facilities to report 

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

all of their U.S. parent companies and 

their respective percentages of 

ownership. The rationale for the 

selection of Option 2 can be found in 

Section II.A.3 of this preamble. 

3. Summary of Public Comments and 

Responses 

This section provides a summary of 

the comments and responses on EPA’s 

proposal to require reporting of U.S. 

parent company and ownership 

information. Also summarized in this 

section are public comments and 

responses on EPA’s consideration of 

reporting numeric identifiers for parent 

companies, in addition to parent 

company names. 

General Comments on Reporting of 

U.S. Parent Company and Ownership 

Information: 

Comments: One commenter noted 

that collecting corporate identifier 

information only from those facilities 

that emit 25,000 metric tons or more of 

CO2 per year would provide only a 

partial picture of a company’s overall 

emissions, as some companies may own 

facilities with emissions below the 

25,000 metric ton threshold. This same 

commenter suggested that EPA should 

encourage company-level data reporting 

and require companies to report the 

relative emissions of each of their 

facilities subject to the reporting rule as 

compared to total company emissions. 

Response: Regarding the first issue, 

when EPA established the GHGRP last 

year, we completed a comprehensive 

threshold analysis and determined that 

a 25,000 metric ton threshold generally 

suited the needs of the Agency by 

providing comprehensive coverage of 

emissions with a reasonable number of 

reporters, thereby creating the robust 

data set necessary for the quantitative 

analyses of the range of likely GHG 

policies, programs and regulations. For 

additional background on thresholds, 

please see Section II.E. of the preamble 

of the final Part 98 (74 FR 56271, 

October 30, 2009). We did not reopen 

that decision in the April 12, 2010 

proposal to add U.S. parent company, 

NAICS codes, and cogeneration as data 

elements to the annual report required 

under 40 CFR 98.3. 

Regarding the second issue, EPA 

interprets the commenter’s remarks to 

indicate that companies, rather than 

individual facilities, should report 

emissions. This issue was also 

addressed when EPA established the 

GHGRP and was not revisited in the 

April 12, 2010 proposal. As described in 

Section II.F of the preamble of the final 

Part 98, the Agency elected to require 

reporting at the facility level in 40 CFR 

part 98 because the purpose of this rule 

is to collect data from suppliers and 

from facilities with direct GHG 

emissions above selected thresholds for 

use in analyzing, developing, and 

implementing current and potential 

future CAA GHG policies and programs. 

Facility-level data are needed to support 

analyses of some types of potential GHG 

reduction programs, such as New 

Source Performance Standards. 

Corporate-level reporting was not 

selected because corporate reporting 

without facility-specific details would 

not provide sufficient data to assess 

many potential CAA GHG policies and 

programs. For additional discussion of 

the level of reporting, please see Section 

II.F of the preamble of the final Part 98 

(74 FR 56273, October 30, 2009). 

Moreover, as explained in the 

proposal and earlier in this preamble, 

EPA determined that reporting of all 

U.S. parent companies and their percent 

ownership will provide the Agency with 

necessary data to develop and improve 

emission inventories and to enhance 

EPA’s implementation of various 

nonregulatory programs aimed at 

encouraging voluntary reductions of 

GHG emissions. Requiring individual 

facilities to report how their emissions 

compare to the total emissions of their 

parent companies would be 

burdensome, because it would require 

each facility to obtain information from 

all the other facilities (including those 

located overseas) owned by their parent 

company(ies) in order to make this type 

of comparison. EPA has concluded that 

the benefit of this information does not 

outweigh the additional burden to the 

regulated entity because the Agency and 

the public can compile similar 

information at a much lower burden by 

analyzing all GHG reports submitted by 

facilities with the same reported U.S. 

parent company. Furthermore, as stated 

above, the GHGRP is a facility and 

supplier level program designed to 

inform future programs and policies 

under the CAA. EPA does not consider 

a full corporate footprint analysis to be 

necessary to meet the goals of this 

program at this time. 

Comment: A commenter from the 

offshore operations sector requested that 

EPA clearly define the parent company 

reporting requirements specific to 

offshore petroleum and natural gas 

facilities. In particular, the commenter 

noted that while the offshore facility 

itself may have a single or multiple 

owners, each development and/or 

production field associated with the 

facility may have multiple owners. The 

commenter added that this situation 

could complicate the determination of 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
57676 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

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

Option 2 was presented in the Economic Impact 

Analysis for the proposed rule. An updated 

estimate of the burden associated with Option 2 

was included in the Economic Impact Analysis for 

the final rule. These documents are available at 

http://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0925. 

percentage of ownership interest for 

each reporting entity. 

Response: Reporting entities (facilities 

or suppliers) are required to report 

information on their own parent 

company or companies, as described in 

Table 2 of this preamble. Parent 

company reporting is limited to 

information on the parents of the 

reporting entity itself, and does not 

include parent company information on 

any associated entities or customers that 

are not part of the reporting entity. The 

facility definition for an offshore 

petroleum/natural gas operator in the 

proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart W: 

Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems 

rulemaking (75 FR 18608, April 12, 

2010) is limited to the offshore platform. 

Production fields and development 

fields that produce oil or gas sent to the 

platform are not considered part of the 

facility. Therefore, the facility reports 

the parent company or companies for 

the platform and secondary platform 

structures connected to the platform via 

walkways, storage tanks associated with 

the platform structure and floating 

production and offloading equipment, 

and does not include company 

information for any associated entities, 

such as production or development 

fields. 

To further clarify, the rule language 

was modified to include the phrase, ‘‘of 

the reporting entity’’ in paragraph 

98.3(c)(11), which requires that 

reporting entities report ‘‘Legal name(s) 

and physical address(es) of the highestlevel United States parent company(s) of 

the reporting entity and the percentage 

of ownership interest for each listed 

parent company as of December 31 of 

the year for which data are being 

reported * * *.’’ 

EPA understands that operations at 

facilities in the oil and natural gas sector 

can be complex with many partners 

working together to explore for, 

produce, process, transport, and 

distribute oil and natural gas products. 

Given the commenter’s use of the term 

‘‘owner’’, EPA clarifies here that 

requirements to identify the ‘‘owner’’ of 

an affected facility are different from the 

requirements to report U.S. parent 

company. For example, ‘‘owner’’ refers 

to the person or legal entity that owns 

the facility and its productive 

infrastructure. Under this final rule, 

U.S. parent company means the highestlevel U.S. company(s) with an 

ownership interest in the reporting 

entity. A regulated entity may report 

‘‘owner’’ differently than U.S. parent 

company in some cases. For example, a 

facility may report ‘‘owner’’ and U.S. 

parent company differently if the legal 

entity that owns the facility is a 

subsidiary to a U.S. parent company. A 

facility may also report ‘‘owner’’ and 

U.S. parent company differently if an 

individual with no company affiliation 

has an ownership interest in a facility, 

since ‘‘owner’’ covers persons while U.S. 

parent company does not. 

Proposed Options 1 and 2: 

Comments: EPA received comments 

supporting both options. Comments 

favoring Option 1 (i.e., requiring 

reporting the legal name and physical 

address of the reporter’s highest-level 

U.S. parent company with the largest 

ownership share and the selection of the 

ownership type that best describes the 

ownership structure for the reporter), 

noted that Option 1 is the less 

burdensome option and questioned 

whether the potential benefits of Option 

2 outweighed the burden of collecting 

the information. Furthermore, the 

comments stated that complex 

ownership structures make it unlikely 

the person completing the form would 

be able to provide the information on all 

parent companies. The comments also 

noted that identifying the general 

corporate structure (as proposed in 

Option 1) should provide the 

information required by EPA and that 

submission of the name of the highestlevel U.S. company with the largest 

ownership interest is consistent with 

TRI reporting requirements. 

Commenters favoring Option 2 (i.e., 

requiring reporting of the legal names, 

physical addresses and respective 

percent ownership of all companies 

with an ownership stake in the 

regulated entity), noted that Option 1 

would overstate the GHG contribution 

of the largest ownership interest and 

omit the contribution of the smaller 

ownership interest(s). The commenters 

stated that this bias could limit the 

usefulness of the parent company data 

and that Option 2 provides a more 

complete picture of reporters’ 

ownership, thereby providing greater 

transparency regarding corporate GHG 

emissions. Some commenters added 

that Option 2 would be more effective 

in terms of corporate accountability. In 

addition, commenters noted that Option 

2 complements recent Securities and 

Exchange Commission (SEC) 

Interpretive Guidance on certain 

existing disclosure rules that requires 

public companies to disclose the impact 

that climate change or regulation related 

to climate change may have on their 

business. An industry commenter stated 

that reporters should not have difficulty 

completing the reporting under either 

option. 

Response: After reviewing the 

comments received, EPA selected 

Option 2 because it provides more 

complete information on parent 

company ownership for reporters with 

multiple parent companies, thereby 

providing greater accuracy in 

aggregating emissions to the parent 

company level. 

EPA acknowledges that there is a 

modest additional burden associated 

with Option 2 for those reporters with 

multiple owners and that Option 1 

would be the lower cost Option.15 The 

additional total national cost of Option 

2 however, was estimated to be less than 

two percent greater than Option 1. The 

burden estimate for Option 2 

incorporates the additional effort 

associated with reporters asking legal or 

management staff for information 

regarding complex ownership structure. 

Option 1 supporters neither offered 

supporting information or estimates of 

the additional burden nor refuted EPA’s 

burden estimates. EPA concluded that 

the additional benefits of Option 2 

compared to Option 1 outweigh the 

potential costs of collecting more 

comprehensive parent company 

information because the additional cost 

of Option 2 is minimal while the 

additional benefit is substantial. 

Legal Authority to Collect Parent 

Company Information: 

Comments: Two commenters 

questioned the need for EPA to collect 

parent company information. One 

commenter stated that company 

affiliation should not be used as a factor 

in policy development. The other 

commenter’s primary objection was that 

EPA had been vague and non-specific in 

justifying collection of parent company 

information. The commenter stated that 

EPA’s authority to collect information 

under CAA section 114 is limited by the 

requirements of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act (5 CFR 1320), under 

which EPA must demonstrate that the 

requested information has ‘‘practical 

utility.’’ The commenter stated that EPA 

had not met the definition of ‘‘practical 

utility’’ in its justification for collecting 

parent company information. The 

commenter added that because practical 

utility is necessary for the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) to grant 

an Information Collection Request (ICR), 

EPA should not finalize this 

requirement until it has identified and 

solicited comment on a practical use. 

Response: As explained in the Section 

I.C of this preamble, CAA section 114 is 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 57677 

sufficiently broad for EPA to collect this 

information. Section 114 of the CAA 

generally authorizes EPA to gather 

information from any person who owns 

or operates an emissions source, who is 

subject to a requirement of the CAA, 

who manufacturers control or process 

equipment, or who the Administrator 

believes has information necessary for 

the purposes of CAA section 114(a). 

EPA may gather information for 

purposes of establishing 

implementation plans or emissions 

standards, determining compliance, or 

‘‘carrying out any provision’’ of the CAA. 

For these reasons, the Administrator 

may request that a person, on a onetime, periodic or continuous basis, 

establish and maintain records, make 

reports, install and operate monitoring 

equipment and, among other things, 

provide such information the 

Administrator may reasonably require. 

This language has been interpreted to 

grant EPA broad authority. See, e.g., 

Dow Chemical Co. v. U.S., 467 U.S. 227, 

233 (1986) (‘‘Regulatory and 

enforcement authority generally carries 

with it all modes of inquiring and 

investigation traditionally employed or 

useful to execute the authority 

granted’’). This information is included 

in the existing ICR. 

It is reasonable for EPA to request the 

parent company information. Once EPA 

has this information, EPA will be able 

to immediately use it to assist in 

implementation of agency policy and 

program goals including developing and 

improving emission inventories and 

enhancing the implementation of 

programs aimed at reducing emissions 

of GHGs. For more information, refer to 

Section I.C of this preamble, where EPA 

has further explained the immediate 

usefulness of this information under the 

CAA. 

Definition of U.S. Parent Company: 

The proposed rule included a 

definition of ‘‘United States parent 

company(s)’’ as follows: ‘‘United States 

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

ownership interest in the reporting 

entity as of December 31 of the reporting 

year.’’ 

Comment: One commenter requested 

that EPA clarify that ‘‘reporting year’’ 

means the year for which emissions data 

are being reported and not the year 

when the report is submitted to EPA. 

Response: The intent in the proposal 

was for ‘‘reporting year’’ to be 

interpreted as the year during which 

GHG data are monitored and collected. 

The language has been clarified in the 

final rule. The revised definition of U.S. 

parent company in the final rule reads: 

‘‘United States parent company(s) 

means the highest-level United States 

company(s) with an ownership interest 

in the reporting entity as of December 

31 of the year for which data are being 

reported.’’ 

Reporting by Foreign Owned 

Companies: 

EPA solicited comments on whether 

facilities and suppliers owned by 

foreign companies always have a U.S.- 

based parent company as defined in the 

proposed rule. EPA was interested in 

receiving comments, data, and analysis 

on whether there may be instances in 

which foreign-owned facilities and 

suppliers do not have a U.S. parent 

company because we wanted to 

determine if U.S. parent company 

reporting would be appropriate for all 

reporters subject to 40 CFR part 98. 

No comments were received on this 

topic, but some minor clarifying 

changes were made in the final rule 

requirements for parent company 

reporting for foreign corporations. For 

consistency, some of these minor 

clarifying changes were also made in the 

final rule requirements for parent 

company reporting for multiple U.S. 

companies. In the final rule, if the 

reporting entity is entirely owned by a 

foreign company, reporters must 

provide the legal name and physical 

address of the foreign company’s 

highest-level company based in the U.S. 

as the U.S. parent company, and report 

100 percent ownership. If the reporting 

entity is partially owned by a foreign 

company and partially owned by one or 

more U.S. companies, reporters provide 

the legal name and physical address of 

the foreign owner’s highest-level 

company based in the U.S. as the U.S. 

parent company, along with the legal 

names and physical addresses of the 

other U.S. parent companies and the 

percent ownership of each of these 

companies. 

Reporting of Numeric Corporate 

Identifiers: 

In the preamble for the proposed rule, 

we discussed a requirement to report a 

numeric identifier for parent 

company(s) in addition to the parent 

company name. EPA requested 

comments on corporate identifiers and 

whether there are any additional 

numeric identifiers that should be 

considered for this final rule. 

Ultimately, EPA chose not to require 

reporting of a corporate numeric 

identifier, upon review of comments 

received and in recognition of the 

limitations of the possible private and 

public sources for such identifiers. 

Comments: Numerous comments 

stated that requiring a unique numeric 

identifier for each parent company 

would facilitate aggregation of the data 

and would achieve the most accurate 

reporter-to-parent linkages. These 

commenters noted that inconsistencies 

in reporting corporate parent names 

(‘‘E.I. Du Pont De Nemours’’ versus ‘‘Du 

Pont Inc.’’) increases the difficulty of the 

reporter-to-parent aggregation and that 

numerical identifiers would increase the 

accuracy and consistency of the 

reported data. While commenters 

acknowledged the significant 

limitations in the numeric identifiers 

discussed in the preamble to the 

proposed rule, including Data Universal 

Number System (DUNS), Committee on 

Uniform Security Identification 

Procedures (CUSIPs), Federal Employer 

Identification Numbers (FEINs), and 

stock tickers, some commenters 

recommended using these identifiers, or 

using new, EPA-generated identifiers. 

Commenters noted that using numeric 

identifiers could provide consistent and 

accurate reporting that minimizes the 

potential of data entry errors. Several 

comments supported EPA’s decision not 

to include a requirement to report 

numeric corporate identifiers because 

existing and available identifiers do not 

meet EPA’s objective of collecting 

comprehensive corporate identifier 

information for all facilities and 

suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 98. 

Response: Based on a review of the 

comments received and on prior 

research, EPA decided to retain its 

position as stated in the proposal, and 

the final rule does not include reporting 

of a corporate identifier for the reasons 

described in this section of the 

preamble. 

EPA agrees with the comments that 

numeric identifiers could potentially 

facilitate data aggregation, however, the 

currently available numeric identifiers 

considered by EPA and proposed by 

commenters have shortcomings such 

that they would not enable EPA to 

adequately aggregate data. As noted in 

Section II.A of the preamble and in the 

memorandum ‘‘Summary of Existing 

Company Identifier System’’ (located in 

docket EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0925), 

some of the identifiers considered (e.g., 

stock tickers, CUSIP, SEC central index 

key, and LexisNexis) cover only public 

companies. EPA expects that reporters 

under the GHGRP will cover both public 

and privately-held companies and does 

not want to exclude a portion of 

reporters from Agency analyses. 

Furthermore, limiting the reporting of a 

numeric identifier to only public 

companies would place an additional 

burden on only this subset of reporters. 

The privately held databases, such as 

DUNS and CUSIPs, require licensing 

agreements, which potentially restrict 

the public use of that data. Finally, in 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
57678 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

16The Office of Management and Budget has 

proposed revisions to the North American Industry 

Classification System for 2012 onward. See ‘‘North 

American Industry Classification System—Updates 

for 2012’’ 75 FR26855, May 12, 2010. These 

revisions will not affect this rulemaking, which 

requires reporters to use the NAICS codes defined 

in the North American Industry Classification 

System Manual 2007, regardless of whether these 

codes are updated in the future. 

accordance with Internal Revenue Code 

6103, FEINs can only be collected and 

released on a voluntary basis and EPA 

would have no means to ensure that all 

facilities/suppliers would report their 

FEINs. 

Additionally, the final rule requires 

both the reporter’s parent company 

name and the parent company’s 

headquarters physical address, which is 

intended to improve considerably on 

EPA’s ability to uniquely identify 

corporate parents. To address comments 

related to difficulties in aggregating data 

using the reported parent company 

name, EPA plans to implement methods 

to standardize the parent company 

names reported. Standardizing the 

parent company names will improve the 

accuracy of aggregating data by parent 

company name by limiting human 

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

removing inconsistent abbreviations 

(e.g., Co. vs. Company). 

In response to comments suggesting 

EPA assign new numeric identifiers to 

parent companies, that task is outside 

the scope of this rulemaking. However, 

the Agency is broadly exploring future 

development of unique, EPA-generated 

numeric identifiers for parent 

companies. These comments reinforce 

EPA’s understanding that such 

identifiers would be valuable for 

aggregating facility level data to the 

corporate level. Any development of 

these identifiers would be a future 

effort, and submission of such 

identifiers is not included in this final 

rule. 

B. NAICS Code(s) 

The proposed rulemaking (75 FR 

18455) includes a requirement to report 

the primary NAICS code applicable to 

each reporter, as well as any additional 

NAICS codes in order of largest revenue 

to smallest. The proposal defined 

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

represents the product(s)/activity(s)/ 

service(s) at a facility or supplier as 

defined in ‘‘North American Industrial 

Classification System Manual 2007,’’ 

available from the U.S. Department of 

Commerce, National Technical 

Information Service. 

Inclusion of NAICS code reporting 

was proposed to provide information to 

assist EPA in aggregating and analyzing 

the data collected under 40 CFR part 98 

at the sector level. 

1. Summary of NAICS Code Reporting 

Requirements 

After considering all of the comments 

received, this final rule requires that 

each facility or supplier required to 

report under 40 CFR part 98 report its 

primary NAICS code and any additional 

applicable NAICS codes. For the 

purposes of this rule, EPA considers a 

reporter’s primary NAICS code to be the 

six-digit code (or codes) that most 

accurately describes the reporter’s 

primary product/activity/service, as 

defined in ‘‘North American Industry 

Classification System Manual 2007,’’ 

available from the U.S. Department of 

Commerce, National Technical 

Information Service.16 The primary 

NAICS code (or codes) is the product/ 

activity/service that is the principal 

source of revenue for the facility or 

supplier. For the purposes of this rule, 

EPA considers additional NAICS codes 

to be those codes that describe the 

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

facility, but that are not related to the 

principal source of revenue. 

The following instructions apply to 

reporters regarding the reporting of 

NAICS codes: Enter the six-digit NAICS 

code that most accurately describes the 

reporter’s principal product/activity/ 

service and designate it as ‘‘primary.’’ 

Each reporter must provide one primary 

NAICS code, but may also designate a 

second code as primary if the reporter 

has two distinct products/activities/ 

services providing comparable revenue. 

Provide all additional NAICS codes that 

describe the reporter’s products/ 

activities/services but that are not 

related to the principal source of 

revenue. Federal facilities should report 

the NAICS code that most closely 

represents the activities taking place at 

the site. For example, a Federallyowned, fossil fuel-fired electric power 

plant would be classified as NAICS 

221112 — Fossil Fuel Electric Power 

Generation. For additional guidance on 

how to determine the proper NAICS 

code(s), go to http://www.census.gov/ 

eos/www/naics/. 

The use of the term ‘‘primary NAICS 

code’’ in this rule and the methodology 

for determining the primary NAICS 

code are consistent with the NAICS 

code use and methodology used by the 

U.S. Census Bureau and other 

government agencies. In addition, the 

instructions for reporting NAICS codes 

in the final rule are similar to those used 

by EPA’s TRI and other EPA 

information collections. 

2. Summary of Major Changes Since 

Proposal 

The major changes since proposal are 

identified in the following list. The 

rationale for these changes can be found 

in Section II.B.3 of this preamble: 

• In the final rule, reporters must 

provide one primary NAICS code and 

may also provide a second primary 

NAICS code if they have two distinct 

products/activities/services providing 

comparable revenue. The proposed rule 

did not specify the number of primary 

NAICS codes that should be reported. 

• In this final rule, no ordering of the 

additional (i.e., non-primary) NAICS 

codes is required. The proposed rule 

required that additional NAICS codes be 

entered in order of largest revenue to 

smallest. 

3. Summary of Public Comments and 

Responses 

This section provides a summary of 

the comments and responses on EPA’s 

proposal to require reporting of primary 

and all additional NAICS codes by 

facilities and suppliers subject to 40 

CFR part 98. 

Primary NAICS Code Reporting 

Requirements: 

Comments: Many commenters 

supported the NAICS codes reporting 

requirements as proposed. Commenters 

stated that requiring the full six-digit 

NAICS code(s) will allow data users to 

connect reported GHG data with other 

information on U.S. industries, 

facilitating comparisons within and 

across industry sectors. Other 

commenters noted that collection of 

NAICS codes greatly expands the utility 

of 40 CFR part 98 data, and provides 

important data relevant to industry 

sector analyses. One industry source 

added that NAICS codes are easily 

obtained. 

Two commenters requested that EPA 

allow reporting of more than one 

primary NAICS code. These 

commenters stated that this is 

particularly important for large facilities 

that consist of separate economic units, 

such as a petroleum refinery and a 

chemical plant. The commenters added 

that this could be important if any 

future climate change legislation 

differentiates regulatory requirements 

according to industry sector or NAICS 

codes, where requirements for refineries 

and chemical plants could differ. 

Accordingly, the commenters 

concluded, EPA should ensure that the 

final rule and any required electronic 

reporting tool allow for entering more 

than one primary NAICS code per 

reporter. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 57679 

17U.S. Code Title 13 guarantees the 

confidentiality of census information and 

establishes penalties for disclosing this information. 

See http://www.census.gov/geo/www/luca2010/ 

luca_title13.html. 

Finally, one commenter stated that 

EPA should obtain primary NAICS 

codes from the Census Bureau. 

Response: EPA agrees with the 

commenters that the NAICS code 

information will provide a valuable data 

element for sector-level analyses. EPA 

considered using three- and four-digit 

NAICS codes, but proposed and is 

requiring reporting of the six-digit 

NAICS codes because they provide more 

detailed information for analyses. In 

addition, use of the six-digit NAICS 

codes is consistent with TRI and other 

EPA databases, allowing sector-level 

data to be compared across EPA data 

sets. 

Upon consideration of the comments 

received regarding multiple primary 

NAICS, EPA requires reporting in the 

final rule of one primary NAICS code 

that most accurately describes the 

reporting entity’s primary product/ 

activity/service. A reporting entity that 

has two distinct products/activities/ 

services providing comparable revenue 

may report a second primary NAICS 

code. Allowing a second NAICS code to 

be designated as a primary NAICS code 

gives facilities and suppliers that have 

two distinct lines of business with 

comparable revenue the ability to more 

accurately reflect the nature of their 

operations. 

In response to the commenters’ 

statement that the electronic reporting 

tool for the GHGRP should allow entry 

of more than one primary NAICS code 

per reporter, EPA’s reporting tool will 

require the reporters to designate one 

NAICS code as primary, and will allow 

up to two NAICS codes to be designated 

as primary. 

EPA also considered whether primary 

NAICS codes could be obtained from 

the Census Bureau, as suggested by one 

commenter. However, the facility-level 

Census Bureau data are confidential as 

specified in U.S. Code Title 13 17, and 

cannot be accessed by EPA. Therefore, 

the final rule requires primary and all 

additional NAICS codes to be reported 

to EPA by the reporting entity. 

Additional NAICS Codes Reporting 

Requirements: 

Comments: Several commenters 

opposed EPA’s proposal that the 

additional (i.e., non-primary) NAICS 

codes reported be listed in the order of 

the largest source of revenue to the 

smallest. Comments in opposition stated 

this ranking: (1) Would add an 

additional and unnecessary burden and 

expense; (2) does not add value to the 

emissions information being reported; 

(3) is an arbitrary exercise, where 

different companies, or different 

employees within a company, could 

derive different ranking of the 

additional NAICS codes; (4) is 

inconsistent with TRI requirements 

where non-primary NAICS codes are 

reported, but not ranked; and (5) could 

disclose CBI that could be accessed by 

foreign or domestic competitors. One 

commenter suggested that reporting of 

NAICS codes beyond the primary 

NAICS codes should be voluntary. 

Response: EPA carefully considered 

the information provided by 

commenters on reporting additional 

(i.e., non-primary) NAICS codes in 

descending order based on revenue. As 

a result of this review, the final rule 

does not require that the additional 

NAICS codes be reported in a particular 

order. After reviewing the comments 

received, EPA agrees that ordering the 

additional NAICS codes by revenue 

could result in added burden that may 

not provide additional benefit compared 

to a list of additional NAICS codes that 

is not ordered, because emissions are 

not necessarily related to revenue. 

Ranking of additional NAICS codes, 

therefore, is not required in the final 

rule. The comments regarding the 

ranking of additional NAICS codes, 

including the possibility of different 

rankings by different employees, the 

need for consistency with TRI, and the 

possibility of divulging CBI are not 

addressed because EPA has determined 

that requiring ranking will not provide 

the Agency with useful additional data 

when compared to the burden. 

In response to the comment 

suggesting that reporting of additional 

NAICS codes be voluntary, EPA retains 

the proposed approach that requires 

mandatory reporting of all additional 

NAICS codes. To conduct analyses of 

the GHG emissions associated with 

different sectors or different types of 

operations, it is critical that these data 

be reported consistently among 

reporters. If reporting of additional (i.e., 

non-primary) NAICS were voluntary, it 

would not be possible to distinguish if 

a reporter entered only one NAICS code 

because only one type of operation is 

conducted, or if only one NAICS code 

was entered due to a voluntary decision 

not to enter additional NAICS codes. 

This inconsistency in reporting 

additional NAICS codes would limit the 

value of analyses characterizing nonprimary operations. To maintain the 

ability to conduct robust analyses using 

the reported NAICS codes, reporting of 

additional NAICS codes is required in 

the final rule. 

Definition of NAICS Codes: 

In the proposed rule, EPA provided a 

definition for ‘‘North American Industry 

Classification System (NAICS) codes’’ as 

follows: ‘‘North American Industry 

Classification System (NAICS) code(s) 

means the six-digit code(s) that 

represents the product(s)/activity(s)/ 

service(s) at a facility or supplier as 

defined in ‘‘North American Industrial 

Classification System Manual 2007,’’ 

available from the U.S. Department of 

Commerce, National Technical 

Information Service.’’ No comments 

were received on this definition, and no 

changes were made in the final rule to 

the definition of ‘‘North American 

Industry Classification System (NAICS) 

codes.’’ 

C. Cogeneration 

In the proposed rulemaking (75 FR 

18455), EPA proposed requirements for 

reporting the use of cogeneration by 

indicating (i.e., checking yes or no) 

whether some or all of the reported GHG 

emissions are from one or more 

cogeneration units. EPA also solicited 

comment on whether this reporting 

should be mandatory or voluntary. In 

the proposal, EPA defined a 

cogeneration unit as a unit that 

produces electrical energy and useful 

thermal energy for industrial, 

commercial, or heating or cooling 

purposes, through the sequential or 

simultaneous use of the original fuel 

energy. 

1. Summary of Cogeneration Reporting 

Requirements 

The final rule requires reporters to 

indicate whether reported emissions 

include emissions from a cogeneration 

unit (yes or no) located at the facility. 

Cogeneration units can result in net 

reductions (i.e., across facilities) of GHG 

emissions compared to separate power 

and heat generation. 

Information on the types and 

characteristics of facilities that employ 

cogeneration technologies and the 

performance of cogeneration units could 

be important to future development of 

GHG mitigation strategies. EPA 

recognizes that the information required 

under this rule may not, by itself, be 

sufficient to determine the actual 

quantity of GHG emissions occurring 

from cogeneration units at individual 

reporting facilities, companies or NAICS 

sectors. It also does not provide the 

degree to which those cogeneration 

emissions displace fossil fuel or other 

fuel source emissions from central 

station generation plants. However, the 

information reported will allow EPA 

and States to identify facilities using 

cogeneration. In addition, EPA 

recognizes that not all emissions at 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
57680 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

individual reporting facilities with 

cogeneration are attributable to the 

cogeneration unit(s). As such, it should 

not be inferred that all emissions at an 

individual reporting facility with 

cogeneration are attributed to the 

cogeneration unit(s). 

2. Summary of Major Changes Since 

Proposal 

The final rule retains the proposed 

rule language and requires reporters to 

indicate whether reported emissions 

include emissions from a cogeneration 

unit. Reporting of this information is 

mandatory. 

3. Summary of Public Comments and 

Responses 

This section provides a summary of 

the comments and responses on EPA’s 

proposal to require reporters to identify 

use of a cogeneration unit located at the 

facility. 

Cogeneration Reporting 

Requirements: 

Comments: Numerous comments 

strongly supported EPA’s proposal to 

require reporters to indicate whether 

some or all of the reported GHG 

emissions are from a cogeneration unit. 

Commenters stated that collecting the 

information on cogeneration use will 

help EPA understand where the practice 

is being used, and how to encourage its 

use where appropriate. None of the 

comments opposed EPA’s proposal to 

collect cogeneration information. 

One commenter requested that EPA 

provide in the rule additional 

discussion of the benefits of 

cogeneration technology as an efficient 

method to reduce net GHG emissions. 

This commenter also requested that EPA 

require power production facilities to 

report GHG emissions on a net GHG per 

usable energy produced basis to ensure 

that the benefits of total system 

efficiency are recognized. 

Another commenter recommended 

EPA consider whether additional 

information on cogeneration units 

should be required in the future, such 

as their capacity or how frequently they 

are used. 

Finally, a commenter recommended 

that EPA clarify and/or modify the rule 

to state that: (1) Local Distribution 

Companies (LDCs) should be required to 

report only the presence of cogeneration 

units at facilities owned and operated 

by the LDC; and (2) as suppliers, LDCs 

are not responsible for reporting 

cogeneration units owned and operated 

by the LDC’s individual customers. 

Response: EPA agrees with comments 

that the cogeneration information will 

be informative, enabling EPA to identify 

the types and characteristics of facilities 

that employ cogeneration technologies. 

By collecting this information annually, 

EPA will also be able to track changes 

in the use of this technology in 

individual sectors and across the U.S. 

economy. 

EPA agrees with the comment that 

there are efficiencies related to the use 

of cogeneration. However, the regulatory 

framework for the GHGRP is not the 

appropriate place to describe the 

benefits of a technology. 

In response to the comment 

requesting that power production 

facilities report GHG emissions on a net 

GHG per usable energy produced, the 

information the commenter asks EPA to 

collect is well beyond the intended 

scope of this rule. The scope of this rule 

is to obtain general information on 

cogeneration use for future development 

of GHG mitigation strategies and not to 

support the development of standards of 

performance for industrial facilities or 

to amend the units in which data are 

required to be reported in 40 CFR part 

98. 

In response to the comments 

requesting EPA collect more detailed 

information on reporters’ cogeneration 

units, EPA recognizes that the 

information required under this rule 

will not, by itself, be sufficient to 

determine the actual quantity of GHG 

emissions occurring from cogeneration 

units at individual reporting facilities, 

companies or NAICS sectors. The 

cogeneration information required 

under the final rule will improve EPA’s 

understanding of the current 

implementation of cogeneration while 

minimizing burden on reporters; 

therefore, EPA is not currently exploring 

expansion of the cogeneration reporting 

requirements. 

EPA agrees with the comment 

regarding the requirements for LDCs to 

report cogeneration. It was not our 

intent to require LDCs to collect 

cogeneration information on their 

customers. EPA is clarifying in this 

response that LDCs are required to 

report the presence of cogeneration 

facilities owned and operated by the 

LDC, but are not required to report 

whether units owned and operated by 

the LDC’s customers have cogeneration 

units. 

Comments on Making Cogeneration 

Reporting Voluntary: 

EPA requested comments on whether 

the cogeneration reporting in the final 

rule should be mandatory or voluntary. 

No comments supported voluntary 

reporting of the cogeneration 

information; however, many 

commenters stated their support for 

EPA’s proposal to require that reporters 

indicate whether or not any of their 

reported emissions are from a 

cogeneration unit at the facility. As in 

the proposed rule, the final rule 

includes mandatory reporting to 

indicate if any reported emissions are 

from cogeneration units located at the 

facility. 

Definition of Cogeneration: 

The proposed rule included a 

definition of ‘‘cogeneration unit’’ as 

follows: ‘‘Cogeneration unit means a 

unit that produces electrical energy and 

useful thermal energy for industrial, 

commercial, or heating or cooling 

purposes, through the sequential or 

simultaneous use of the original fuel 

energy.’’ EPA based this definition of 

cogeneration on the Agency’s Acid Rain 

Program to promote consistency and 

comparable data collection across EPA 

regulatory programs. No comments were 

received on this definition, and no 

changes were made in the final rule to 

the definition of ‘‘cogeneration’’ 

included in the proposed rule. 

D. Frequency of Reporting 

In the proposed rulemaking (75 FR 

18455), EPA proposed that facilities and 

suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 98 be 

required to submit information 

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

their NAICS code(s), and whether or not 

any of their reported emissions are from 

a cogeneration unit, on an annual basis, 

as part of their annual reports. EPA 

further proposed that regulated entities 

be required to report this information as 

it exists on December 31 of the year for 

which data are being reported, to be 

consistent with other EPA reporting 

programs, such as TRI. 

1. Summary of the Final Rule 

Requirements 

Under the final rule, facilities and 

suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 98 are 

required to annually submit information 

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

their NAICS code(s), and whether or not 

any of their reported emissions are from 

a cogeneration unit, as part of their 

annual GHG reporting. Regulated 

entities report this information as it 

exists on December 31 of the year for 

which data are being reported. Facilities 

will be required to report this data 

beginning in 2011 for the 2010 reporting 

year. 

2. Summary of Major Changes Since 

Proposal 

There have been no changes since 

proposal. 

3. Summary of Public Comments and 

Responses 

This section provides a summary of 

the comments and responses on EPA’s 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 57681 

proposal to require annual reporting for 

the data elements added to 40 CFR part 

98 in the final rule (i.e., U.S. parent 

company(s), NAICS code(s), and 

cogeneration by facilities and suppliers). 

While EPA was interested in receiving 

comments on the proposal in its 

entirety, EPA specifically solicited 

comments on the utility and burden of 

updating the additional information 

required by the proposed rule on a more 

frequent basis than annually, for 

example, whenever changes occur with 

respect to a reporter’s U.S. parent 

company or NAICS code(s). 

Comments: The comments received 

largely supported EPA’s proposal to 

require reporting of U.S. parent 

company(s), NAICS code(s), and 

cogeneration units on an annual basis, 

rather than more frequently. One 

commenter supporting annual reporting 

stated a concern with the potential 

burden and complexity of updating 

corporate parent information more often 

than annually. For more frequent 

reporting, the commenter added, EPA 

would need to identify a specific need 

for the increased level of detail. 

One commenter noted that if 

reporting were required quarterly, data 

could be aggregated to each parent 

company’s fiscal year. Another 

commenter stated that requiring updates 

to be reported whenever a change 

occurs in the reporter’s parent company 

or NAICS code should not be a problem. 

This commenter added that the annual 

reporting requirement, however, may be 

sufficient. 

Response: EPA recognizes that a 

reporter’s U.S. parent company(s) and/ 

or NAICS code(s) may change during 

the course of the year. In some instances 

this information may even change 

multiple times throughout the year. 

However, EPA agrees with the 

commenters that requiring updates to 

these data elements more than once a 

year, such as every time there is a 

change in a reporter’s U.S. parent 

company(s) or NAICS code(s), would 

result in an increased burden for 

minimal additional information. In 

addition, requiring annual reporting 

would be consistent with the 

requirements of 40 CFR part 98. 

Therefore, the final rule requires annual 

reporting of reporters’ U.S. parent 

company(s), NAICS code(s), and 

whether or not any of their reported 

emissions are from a cogeneration unit, 

as part of their regularly scheduled 

annual reports, as proposed. More 

frequent reporting, such as when a 

change in parent company or NAICS 

occurs, is not required. 

E. Applicability of the Reporting 

Requirements 

1. Summary of Applicability of the 

Reporting Requirements 

The final rule applies to all reporters; 

it requires all facilities and suppliers 

subject to 40 CFR part 98 to report the 

additional information included in this 

rule. The descriptions of the terms 

‘‘primary NAICS code(s),’’ and 

‘‘additional NAICS code(s),’’ and the 

definitions of ‘‘United States parent 

company’’ and ‘‘cogeneration unit’’ in 

the final rule apply only to this rule, 

which adds these data elements to the 

list of items that must be reported under 

40 CFR 98.3(c). The definitions and 

descriptions of terms in this final rule 

do not change the applicability of any 

subpart in the promulgated 40 CFR part 

98. They also do not change the level of 

reporting or who is required to submit 

reports. 

The definition of United States parent 

company does not override or change 

the meaning of similar terms that refer 

to company level or corporate level 

requirements. Many subparts (including 

40 CFR part 98, subparts A, C, G, K, P, 

Q, R, Y, GG, and HH) use the term 

‘‘company records,’’ which is defined in 

40 CFR part 98, subpart A. The term 

‘‘corporate level’’ is used in 40 CFR part 

98, subpart MM to require importers 

and exporters to report at the corporate 

level, rather than the facility level. 

‘‘Corporate documents’’ are referred to in 

40 CFR part 98, subpart A. None of 

these terms, definitions, or associated 

requirements are affected by the 

definition of ‘‘United States parent 

company’’ in the final rule. 

In addition, the definition of United 

States parent company in the final rule 

does not affect the definitions of 

‘‘importer’’ and ‘‘exporter’’ in 40 CFR part 

98, subpart A, or the applicability of the 

suppliers source categories. The 

definition in the final rule also does not 

affect the term ‘‘local distribution 

company’’ as described in 40 CFR part 

98, subpart NN. These terms retain their 

meaning in 40 CFR part 98. 

2. Summary of Major Changes Since 

Proposal 

There have been no changes since the 

proposal. 

3. Summary of Public Comments and 

Responses 

No comments were received on the 

applicability of the reporting 

requirements. 

F. Miscellaneous Public Comments and 

Responses 

EPA also received comments of a 

more general nature that did not relate 

specifically to reporting of parent 

company, NAICS codes, cogeneration, 

frequency of reporting, or applicability. 

These comments and EPA’s responses 

are summarized in this section. 

Comments: Two commenters voiced 

general support for this rule. The 

commenters asserted that the inclusion 

of the requirements to report NAICS 

codes and corporate information will 

enable researchers to conduct analyses 

of corporate GHG emissions. Another 

commenter voiced opposition to the 

rule, stating that the government already 

has enough rules and regulations. 

Response: EPA thanks the 

commenters for their input. The focus of 

this rule is to collect accurate data on 

U.S. GHGs from suppliers and facilities 

above specified thresholds for use in 

analyzing and developing potential 

GHG policies and environmental 

programs. This rule will help EPA carry 

out its duties under the CAA while 

adding a very minimal burden to 

reporting entities. 

Comment: One commenter requested 

that EPA make the information collected 

under this rule available to the public 

and easily accessible to all interested 

parties. 

Response: EPA published a proposed 

confidentiality determination on July 7, 

2010 (75 FR 39094), which addressed 

the confidentiality of data reported 

under 40 CFR part 98. In that action, 

EPA proposed which specific data 

elements would be treated as CBI and 

which data elements must be available 

to the public under CAA section 114. 

EPA has received several comments on 

the proposal, and is in the process of 

considering these comments. A final 

determination will be issued before any 

data are released, and data that are not 

determined to be confidential will be 

published in a way that will be easily 

accessible to the public. 

Comment: One commenter suggested 

that EPA should develop a 

comprehensive company-level GHG 

inventory. 

Response: While the development of 

a comprehensive company-level GHG 

inventory is outside the scope of this 

rulemaking, EPA notes the commenter’s 

suggestion and thanks the commenter 

for their input. For a discussion of why 

EPA chose to require facility-level 

reporting, please see Section II.F of the 

preamble of the final Part 98 (74 FR 

56273, October 30, 2009) as well as 

Section II.A of the preamble to this final 

rule. For a discussion of why EPA chose 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
57682 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

18See Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases 

from Magnesium Production, Underground Coal 

Mines, Industrial Wastewater Treatment, and 

Industrial Waste Landfills; Final Rule (75 FR 39736, 

July 12, 2010). 

a 25,000 metric ton CO2e reporting 

threshold for most sources, please see 

Section II.E. of the preamble of the final 

Part 98 (74 FR 56271, October 30, 2009) 

as well as Section II.A of the preamble 

to this final rule. 

G. Correction to Subpart A 

We also are correcting a drafting error 

in the revision to 40 CFR 98.2(a)(2) that 

was published on July 12, 2010 (75 FR 

39758). In the July 12, 2010 notice, we 

restructured 40 CFR 98.2(a) to move the 

lists of source categories that are subject 

to the rule from the text into tables. This 

restructuring revision made no 

substantive change to the applicability 

provisions of the rule, but just 

reformatted that section of the rule to 

better accommodate the addition of new 

source categories for which reporting 

would become effective in future years. 

To make this change required 

conforming changes to the text of 40 

CFR 98.2(a) to refer to the tables. The 

July 12, 2010 change to 40 CFR 

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

A facility that contains any source category 

that is listed in Table A–4 of this subpart that 

emits 25,000 metric tons CO2e or more per 

year in combined emissions from stationary 

fuel combustion units, miscellaneous uses of 

carbonate, and all applicable source 

categories that are listed in Table A–3 and 

Table A–4 of this subpart. 

The published clause inadvertently 

omitted the word ‘‘and’’ prior to the 

clause ‘‘* * * that emits 25,000 metric 

tons CO2e * * *’’ Despite this omission, 

the regulatory text as it appears in the 

July 12, 2010 final rule can and should 

be interpreted to apply to a facility that 

contains any source category listed in 

Table A–4 of this subpart if combined 

emissions from all applicable source 

categories at the facility are 25,000 

metric tons CO2e per year or more. 

Nonetheless, restoring the inadvertently 

omitted word ‘‘and’’ to the paragraph 

makes it absolutely clear that the 25,000 

metric tons CO2e threshold applies at 

the facility level and not at the source 

category level. This interpretation is 

clear from the original rule and from the 

preamble to the proposal for the subpart 

A restructuring (75 FR 12451 and 75 FR 

12489) and the preamble to the final 

rule for the restructuring (75 FR 39739). 

As published, 40 CFR 98.2(a)(2) is 

technically correct, but reinserting the 

‘‘and’’ makes it clearer and less subject 

to misinterpretation, and makes the 

sentence structure parallel to that of the 

original rule text. Therefore, we are 

revising 40 CFR 98.2(a)(2) by restoring 

the word ‘‘and’’ to read as follows 

(emphasis added): 

A facility that contains any source category 

that is listed in Table A–4 of this subpart and 

that emits 25,000 metric tons CO2e or more 

per year in combined emissions from 

stationary fuel combustion units, 

miscellaneous uses of carbonate, and all 

applicable source categories that are listed in 

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

III. Economic Impacts of the Final Rule 

This section of the preamble examines 

the costs and economic impacts of the 

final rulemaking and the estimated 

economic impacts of the rule on affected 

entities, including estimated impacts on 

small entities. Complete detail on the 

economic impacts of the final rule can 

be found in the text of the Economic 

Impact Analysis (EIA) for the final rule 

(located in docket EPA–HQ–OAR– 

2009–0925). 

A. How were compliance costs 

estimated? 

1. Summary of Method Used To 

Estimate Compliance Costs 

The cost analysis estimates the 

incremental contributions to total 

reporting burden expected under 40 

CFR part 98 and compliance costs 

associated with reporting the data 

elements described above. EPA 

estimated compliance costs based on the 

time reporters spend meeting the 

requirements and the associated labor 

wage rates. EPA’s estimated costs of 

compliance are discussed in this section 

of the preamble and in greater detail in 

Section 4 of the EIA. 

Labor Costs. All of the reporting cost 

estimates include the time of managers, 

lawyers, and technical staff in both the 

private sector and the public sector. To 

reflect that both management and 

technical staff will be involved in 

reporting the above data elements, an 

overall blended wage rate was 

developed based on estimates from the 

TRI program for similar data element 

reporting at similar facilities. 

Management staff is estimated to be 

involved in approximately 0.8 percent 

of the reporting, while technical staff is 

likely to be needed for the remaining 

99.2 percent. Thus, the blended wage 

rate used in this analysis is $60.22 per 

hour. The amount of time required for 

facilities with one owner is 80 minutes 

per facility in the first year and 40 

minutes per facility in subsequent years; 

time estimated for facilities with more 

than one owner is 125 minutes per 

facility in the first year and 85 minutes 

per facility in subsequent years. 

Cost basis. The cost analysis is based 

on facilities and suppliers currently 

subject to 40 CFR part 98, including 

subparts that were finalized after EPA 

proposed the rule to require reporting of 

corporate parent information, NAICS 

codes and cogeneration.18 Specifically, 

the finalization of 40 CFR part 98, 

subparts T (Magnesium Production), FF 

(Underground Coal Mines), TT 

(Industrial Waste Landfills), and II 

(Industrial Wastewater Treatment) 

resulted in a higher number of facilities 

and suppliers subject to this final rule. 

The analysis does not account for those 

expected to be added to 40 CFR part 98 

through upcoming actions. The methods 

and assumptions used to estimate the 

compliance costs for facilities and 

suppliers currently subject to the rule 

would likewise apply to those facilities 

and suppliers that may be added to the 

40 CFR part 98 reporting program in the 

future. The addition of new facilities or 

suppliers would therefore increase the 

total compliance costs in proportion to 

the increase of the reporting universe. 

Accordingly, EPA does not expect the 

burden for newly added industries to 

change the conclusions of this economic 

analysis. 

B. What are the costs of the rule? 

1. Summary of Costs 

As shown in Table 3 of this preamble, 

the total national cost under this final 

rule is approximately $944,000 in the 

first year and about $470,000 in 

subsequent years (all estimates are in 

$2006). Costs include a public sector 

burden estimate of $90,000 in the first 

year and $40,000 in subsequent years 

for program implementation and data 

verification activities. See Table 3 in 

Section IV.A of this preamble for a 

summary of the costs. 

C. What are the economic impacts of the 

rule? 

1. Summary of Economic Impacts 

EPA prepared an economic analysis to 

evaluate the impacts of the final rule. 

The analysis estimates the private direct 

compliance costs per facility and 

provides a national burden estimate, 

which includes public costs associated 

with program implementation and 

verification activities. Reporting costs 

were estimated to be less than $100 per 

facility. As a result, the rule is unlikely 

to result in significant changes in firms’ 

production decisions or economic 

choices. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 57683 

D. What are the impacts of the rule on 

small businesses? 

1. Summary of Impacts on Small 

Businesses 

As required by the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (RFA) and the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act (SBREFA), EPA assessed 

the potential impacts of the rule on 

small entities (small businesses, 

governments, and non-profit 

organizations). (See Section IV.C of this 

preamble for definitions of small 

entities.) 

EPA conducted a screening 

assessment comparing compliance costs 

for affected industry sectors to industryspecific receipts data for establishments 

owned by small businesses. This ratio 

constitutes a ‘‘sales’’ test that computes 

the annualized compliance costs of this 

rule as a percentage of sales and 

determines whether the ratio exceeds 

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

The average ratio of annualized 

reporting program costs to revenues of 

small entities would be less than 0.01 

percent. As a result, EPA has concluded 

that this action will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under the terms of 

Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993) and is therefore 

not subject to review under the EO. 

Although this is not a significant 

economic rule, EPA prepared an 

analysis of the potential costs and 

benefits associated with the final rule to 

provide insights on the potential effects. 

This analysis is contained in the 

Economic Impact Analysis. A copy of 

the analysis is available in the docket 

(EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0925) for this 

action and is briefly summarized here. 

In the economic analysis, EPA 

identified the final rule’s compliance 

burden and the costs. The cost analysis, 

presented in Section III.B of this 

preamble, estimates the total annualized 

burden, which is presented in Table 3 

of this preamble. 

TABLE 3—COST SUMMARY UNDER THE FINAL RULEMAKING (IN THOUSANDS, $2006) 

Cost Year 1 Subsequent years 

National compliance ................................................................................................................................ $854 $430 

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

Total .................................................................................................................................................. 944 470 

Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding. 

Overall, EPA has concluded that the 

costs of collecting U.S. parent 

company(s), NAICS codes, and 

cogeneration information as part of 40 

CFR part 98 are outweighed by the 

potential benefits of more 

comprehensive information about GHG 

emissions. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The information collection 

requirements for this final rule have 

been submitted for approval to OMB 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq. An ICR document 

was previously prepared for 40 CFR part 

98 and was assigned EPA ICR number 

2300.03. The information collection 

requirements of this amendment to 40 

CFR part 98 are documented in an 

additional ICR document, which was 

assigned EPA ICR number 2374.02. 

The data collected through this final 

rule would be immediately available to 

EPA and could be used for the purposes 

of providing additional information to 

support more effective research and 

develop actions to address GHG 

emissions. For example, corporate 

parent and NAICS data would assist 

EPA in developing and improving 

emission inventories, as well as 

characterizing emissions data in several 

different ways. A more detailed 

understanding of the sources and 

operational categories of GHG emissions 

could lead to improvements in air 

pollution emissions information that is 

relied upon to develop effective control 

strategies. For example, EPA could use 

the NAICS code information gathered by 

this rule to compare results both within 

industries and across industry sectors. 

In addition, the information gathered 

through this rule will be immediately 

available to enhance EPA’s 

implementation of various 

nonregulatory programs aimed at 

encouraging voluntary reductions of 

GHG emissions. Under the authority of 

CAA section 103, EPA has launched a 

variety of nonregulatory programs 

aimed at reducing emissions of GHGs. 

The additional data will assist EPA by 

providing more detailed information on 

possible sources, and facility operations 

within industrial sectors for EPA to 

work with in the context of these 

programs. 

This information collection is 

mandatory and will be carried out under 

CAA section 114. EPA published a 

proposed confidentiality determination 

on July 7, 2010 (75 FR 39094) that 

specified which data reporting elements 

in 40 CFR part 98 would be treated as 

CBI and which data elements must be 

available to the public under CAA 

section 114. A final determination will 

be issued before any part 98 data are 

released. 

As outlined in ICR number 2374.02, 

the projected average annual cost and 

hour burden for non-Federal 

respondents is about $571,000 and 

9,500 hours. The estimated average 

annual burden per response is 0.15 

hour; the frequency of response is 

annual for all respondents that must 

comply with the final rule; and the 

estimated average number of likely 

respondents per year is 10,551. The cost 

burden to respondents resulting from 

the collection of information includes 

the total capital cost annualized over the 

equipment’s expected useful life 

(averaging $0), a total operation and 

maintenance component (averaging $0 

per year), and a labor cost component 

(averaging $571,000). Burden is defined 

at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). These cost numbers 

differ from those shown elsewhere in 

the EIA (EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0925) 

because ICR costs represent the average 

cost over the first three years of the rule, 

whereas the EIA reports costs separately 

for the first and subsequent years of the 

rule. Also, the total cost estimate of the 

rule in the EIA includes the cost to the 

Agency to administer the program. The 

ICR differentiates between respondent 

burden and cost to the Agency. 

An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to, a collection of information 

unless it displays a currently valid OMB 

control number. The OMB control 

numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40 

CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
57684 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

generally requires an agency to prepare 

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any 

rule subject to notice and comment 

requirements under the Administrative 

Procedure Act or any other statute, 

unless the agency certifies that the rule 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. Small entities include small 

businesses, small organizations, and 

small governmental jurisdictions. 

For purposes of assessing the impacts 

of the final rule on small entities, small 

entity is defined as: (1) A small business 

as defined by the Small Business 

Administration’s regulations at 13 CFR 

121.201; (2) a small governmental 

jurisdiction that is a government of a 

city, county, town, school district or 

special district with a population of less 

than 50,000; and (3) a small 

organization that is any not-for-profit 

enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of the final rule on small 

entities, I certify that this action will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

The additional per-entity costs under 

the final rule are substantially smaller 

(less than $81 in year 1 and $41 in 

subsequent years) than the burden for 

the overall rule. The costs are therefore 

not enough to constitute a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. The small 

entities directly regulated by the final 

rule include small businesses across all 

sectors encompassed by the rule, small 

governmental jurisdictions and small 

non-profits. We have determined that 

some small businesses will be affected 

because their production processes emit 

GHGs that must be reported, or because 

they have stationary combustion units 

on site that emit GHGs that must be 

reported. Small governments and small 

non-profits are generally affected 

because they have regulated landfills or 

stationary combustion units on site, or 

because they own a local distribution 

company subject to 40 CFR part 98, 

subpart NN (natural gas suppliers). 

At promulgation of 40 CFR part 98, 

EPA examined the impact on small 

entities (74 FR 56369, October 30, 2009). 

In addition, EPA described the steps 

taken by EPA to reduce the impact of 40 

CFR part 98 on small entities. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 

1531–1538, requires Federal agencies, 

unless otherwise prohibited by law, to 

assess the effects of their regulatory 

actions on State, local, and Tribal 

governments and the private sector. 

Federal agencies must also develop a 

plan to provide notice to small 

governments that might be significantly 

or uniquely affected by any regulatory 

requirements. The plan must enable 

officials of affected small governments 

to have meaningful and timely input in 

the development of EPA regulatory 

proposals with significant Federal 

intergovernmental mandates and must 

inform, educate, and advise small 

governments on compliance with the 

regulatory requirements. 

The final rule does not contain a 

Federal mandate that may result in 

expenditures of $100 million or more 

for State, local, and Tribal governments, 

in the aggregate, or the private sector in 

any one year. As shown in the EIA 

(EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0925), EPA 

estimated the several national cost 

estimates and found annual 

expenditures were below $100 million 

threshold. Thus, the final rule is not 

subject to the requirements of UMRA 

sections 202 or 205. 

The final rule is also not subject to the 

requirements of UMRA section 203 

because it contains no regulatory 

requirements that might significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. The 

final new rule requires facilities and 

suppliers already subject to 40 CFR part 

98 to provide additional data in each 

annual GHG report, and the additional 

data elements required are the same for 

all reporters (private and public). In 

addition, EPA’s small entity analysis 

shows the average ratio of annualized 

reporting program costs to revenues 

would be less than 0.01 percent. 

This final rule amends 40 CFR part 98 

and applies directly to reporters that 

supply fuel or industrial gases that 

when used emit GHGs, and to reporters 

that directly emit GHGs. The final rule 

does not apply to governmental entities 

unless the government entity owns a 

facility that directly emits GHGs above 

threshold levels such as a landfill or 

large stationary combustion source. In 

addition, the final rule does not impose 

any implementation responsibilities on 

State, local, or Tribal governments and 

it is not expected to increase the cost of 

existing regulatory programs managed 

by those governments. Thus, the 

impacts on governments affected by the 

final rule are expected to be minimal. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on the States, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in EO 

13132. However, for a more detailed 

discussion about how 40 CFR part 98 

relates to existing State programs, please 

see Section II of the preamble to the 

final Part 98 (74 FR 56266, October 30, 

2009). 

This final rule applies directly to 

reporters that supply fuel or chemicals 

that when used emit GHGs or facilities 

that directly emit GHGs. It does not 

apply to governmental entities unless 

the government entity owns a facility 

that directly emits GHGs above 

threshold levels such as a landfill or 

large stationary combustion source, so 

relatively few government facilities 

would be affected. This final rule also 

does not limit the power of States or 

localities to collect GHG data and/or 

regulate GHG emissions. Thus, EO 

13132 does not apply to this action. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This final rule is not expected to have 

Tribal implications, as specified in EO 

13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

The final rule applies directly to entities 

that supply fuel or chemicals that when 

used emit GHGs or facilities that 

directly emit GHGs. This final rule does 

not pose significant costs on either a 

per-entity or national basis; few, if any, 

facilities or suppliers that are expected 

to be affected by the final rule are 

anticipated to be owned by Tribal 

governments. This final rule also does 

not limit the power of Tribes to collect 

GHG data and/or regulate GHG 

emissions. Thus, EO 13175 does not 

apply to the final rule. 

Although EO 13175 does not apply to 

this final rule, EPA sought opportunities 

to provide information to Tribal 

governments and representatives during 

development of the rule, as documented 

in the preamble to the promulgated final 

Part 98 (74 FR 56371). 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR 

19885, April 23, 1997) as applying only 

to those regulatory actions that concern 

health or safety risks, such that the 

analysis required under section 5–501 of 

the EO has the potential to influence the 

regulation. This action is not subject to 

EO 13045 because it does not establish 

an environmental standard intended to 

mitigate health or safety risks. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 57685 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not subject to EO 13211 

(66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)), because 

it is not a significant regulatory action 

under EO 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104– 

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

use voluntary consensus standards in its 

regulatory activities unless to do so 

would be inconsistent with applicable 

law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary 

consensus standards are technical 

standards (e.g., materials specifications, 

test methods, sampling procedures, and 

business practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA 

to provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when the Agency decides 

not to use available and applicable 

voluntary consensus standards. 

This final rule does not involve 

technical standards. Therefore, EPA is 

not considering the use of any voluntary 

consensus standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994) establishes Federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

Federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

EPA has determined that this final 

rule will not have disproportionately 

high and adverse human health or 

environmental effects on minority or 

low-income populations because it does 

not affect the level of protection 

provided to human health or the 

environment. The final rule does not 

affect the level of protection provided to 

human health or the environment 

because it addresses information 

collection and reporting. 

K. Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this rule and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule 

will be effective November 22, 2010. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 98 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Greenhouse gases, Suppliers, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: September 16, 2010. 

Lisa P. Jackson, 

Administrator. 

■ For the reasons stated in the preamble, 

title 40, chapter I, of the Code of Federal 

Regulations is amended as follows: 

PART 98—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 98 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart A—[Amended] 

■ 2. Section 98.2 is amended by revising 

paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows: 

§ 98.2 Who must report? 

(a) * * * 

(2) A facility that contains any source 

category that is listed in Table A–4 of 

this subpart and that emits 25,000 

metric tons CO2e or more per year in 

combined emissions from stationary 

fuel combustion units, miscellaneous 

uses of carbonate, and all applicable 

source categories that are listed in Table 

A–3 and Table A–4 of this subpart. For 

these facilities, the annual GHG report 

must cover stationary fuel combustion 

sources (subpart C of this part), 

miscellaneous use of carbonates 

(subpart U of this part), and all 

applicable source categories listed in 

Table A–3 and Table A–4 of this 

subpart. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Section 98.3 is amended as follows: 

■ a. By adding paragraph (c)(4)(v). 

■ b. By adding paragraph (c)(10). 

■ c. By adding paragraph (c)(11). 

§ 98.3 What are the general monitoring, 

reporting, recordkeeping and verification 

requirements of this part? 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(4) * * * 

(v) Indicate (yes or no) whether 

reported emissions include emissions 

from a cogeneration unit located at the 

facility. 

* * * * * 

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

reporting entity. (i) Primary NAICS 

code. Report the NAICS code that most 

accurately describes the reporting 

entity’s primary product/activity/ 

service. The primary product/activity/ 

service is the principal source of 

revenue for the reporting entity. A 

reporting entity that has two distinct 

products/activities/services providing 

comparable revenue may report a 

second primary NAICS code. 

(ii) Additional NAICS code(s). Report 

all additional NAICS codes that describe 

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

reporting entity that are not related to 

the principal source of revenue. 

(11) Legal name(s) and physical 

address(es) of the highest-level United 

States parent company(s) of the 

reporting entity and the percentage of 

ownership interest for each listed parent 

company as of December 31 of the year 

for which data are being reported 

according to the following instructions: 

(i) If the reporting entity is entirely 

owned by a single United States 

company that is not owned by another 

company, provide that company’s legal 

name and physical address as the 

United States parent company and 

report 100 percent ownership. 

(ii) If the reporting entity is entirely 

owned by a single United States 

company that is, itself, owned by 

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

subsidiary of a higher-level company), 

provide the legal name and physical 

address of the highest-level company in 

the ownership hierarchy as the United 

States parent company and report 100 

percent ownership. 

(iii) If the reporting entity is owned by 

more than one United States company 

(e.g., company A owns 40 percent, 

company B owns 35 percent, and 

company C owns 25 percent), provide 

the legal names and physical addresses 

of all the highest-level companies with 

an ownership interest as the United 

States parent companies, and report the 

percent ownership of each company. 

(iv) If the reporting entity is owned by 

a joint venture or a cooperative, the joint 

venture or cooperative is its own United 

States parent company. Provide the 

legal name and physical address of the 

joint venture or cooperative as the 

United States parent company, and 

report 100 percent ownership by the 

joint venture or cooperative. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
57686 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(v) If the reporting entity is entirely 

owned by a foreign company, provide 

the legal name and physical address of 

the foreign company’s highest-level 

company based in the United States as 

the United States parent company, and 

report 100 percent ownership. 

(vi) If the reporting entity is partially 

owned by a foreign company and 

partially owned by one or more U.S. 

companies, provide the legal name and 

physical address of the foreign 

company’s highest-level company based 

in the United States, along with the 

legal names and physical addresses of 

the other U.S. parent companies, and 

report the percent ownership of each of 

these companies. 

(vii) If the reporting entity is a 

federally owned facility, report ‘‘U.S. 

Government’’ and and do not report 

physical address or percent ownership. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Section 98.6 is amended by adding 

definitions of ‘‘Cogeneration unit,’’ 

‘‘North American Industry Classification 

System (NAICS) code(s),’’ ‘‘Physical 

address,’’ and ‘‘United States parent 

company(s)’’ in alphabetical order to 

read as follows: 

§ 98.6 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Cogeneration unit means a unit that 

produces electrical energy and useful 

thermal energy for industrial, 

commercial, or heating or cooling 

purposes, through the sequential or 

simultaneous use of the original fuel 

energy. 

* * * * * 

North American Industry 

Classification System (NAICS) code(s) 

means the six-digit code(s) that 

represents the product(s)/activity(s)/ 

service(s) at a facility or supplier as 

listed in the Federal Register and 

defined in ‘‘North American Industrial 

Classification System Manual 2007,’’ 

available from the U.S. Department of 

Commerce, National Technical 

Information Service, Alexandria, VA 

22312, phone (703) 605–6000 or (800) 

553–6847. http://www.census.gov/eos/ 

www/naics/. 

* * * * * 

Physical address, with respect to a 

United States parent company as 

defined in this section, means the street 

address, city, state and zip code of that 

company’s physical location. 

* * * * * 

United States parent company(s) 

means the highest-level United States 

company(s) with an ownership interest 

in the reporting entity as of December 

31 of the year for which data are being 

reported. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2010–23674 Filed 9–17–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 261 

[EPA–R05–RCRA–2010–0758; FRL–9201–2] 

Hazardous Waste Management 

System; Identification and Listing of 

Hazardous Waste Amendment 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule; amendment. 

SUMMARY: The EPA (also, ‘‘the Agency’’ 

or ‘‘we’’) is amending the exclusion for 

the American Steel Cord facility in 

Scottsburg, Indiana to reflect changes in 

ownership and name. 

DATES: This amendment is effective on 

September 22, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Todd Ramaly, Land and Chemicals 

Division, Region 5, Mail Code LR–8J, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, Illinois 

60604; telephone number: (312) 353– 

9317; fax number: (312) 582–5190; 

e-mail address: ramaly.todd@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

In this document EPA is amending 

appendix IX to part 261 to reflect a 

change in the status of a particular 

exclusion and, as such, will apply to a 

single facility. 

B. How can I get copies of related 

information? 

EPA has established a docket for this 

action under Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

2010–0758. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Records Center, 7th floor, U.S. EPA 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Blvd., 

Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is 

open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. We recommend you telephone 

Todd Ramaly at (312) 353–9317 before 

visiting the Region 5 office. The public 

may copy material from the regulatory 

docket at $0.15 per page. 

C. Why is EPA taking this action? 

The petition process under Title 40 

Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR) 

260.20 and 260.22 allows facilities to 

demonstrate that a specific waste from 

a particular generating facility should 

not be regulated as a hazardous waste. 

Based on waste-specific information 

provided by the petitioner, EPA granted 

an exclusion for up to 3,000 cubic yards 

of F006, wastewater treatment sludges 

from electroplating operations, annually 

to American Steel Cord, Scottsburg (64 

FR 3869, January 26, 1999). 

On April 22, 2010, the Agency was 

notified that ownership of the 

Scottsburg facility had been transferred 

to Tokusen U.S.A., Inc. Scottsburg <JFS 

America> (Tokusen). Tokusen certified 

it will meet all terms and conditions set 

forth in the delisting and will not 

change the characteristics of the waste 

at the Scottsburg facility without prior 

Agency approval. This notice 

documents the change by updating 

appendix IX to incorporate a change in 

name. 

There are also a number of minor 

typographical errors identified in the 

existing exclusion that will be fixed by 

this amendment. The sentences 

containing the list of verification 

constituents in condition 1 of the 

exclusion are combined with a colon 

and the list of allowable concentrations 

with semicolons. The constituent 

‘‘benzo butyl phthlate’’ is corrected to 

‘‘benzylbutylphthalate’’. A zero is added 

before the decimal for concentrations 

that are less than 1. The description of 

the waste is corrected from ‘‘wastewater 

treatment plant (WWTP) sludge’’ to 

‘‘wastewater treatment sludges’’ 

(description based on the listing). 

Confusing timing language in condition 

4(d) of the exclusion is corrected from 

‘‘* * * (if no information is presented 

under paragraph (c) the initial receipt of 

information described in paragraph (a) 

***’’ to ‘‘* * * if no information is 

presented under paragraph (c) * * *’’ 

These changes to appendix IX of part 

261 are effective September 22, 2010. 

The Hazardous and Solid Waste 

Amendments of 1984 amended section 

3010 of the Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act (RCRA) to allow rules to 

become effective in less than six months 

when the regulated community does not 

need the six-month period to come into 

compliance. As described above, the 

facility has certified that it is prepared 

to comply. Therefore, a six-month delay 

in the effective date is not necessary in 

this case. This provides the basis for 

making this amendment effective 

immediately upon publication under 

the Administrative Procedures Act 

pursuant to 5 United States Code 

(U.S.C.) 5531(d). 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES