RTI International is a trade name of Research Triangle Institute

TO: Shaun Ragnauth, U.S. EPA 

FROM: Brooks Depro 

DATE: June 22, 2010 

SUBJECT: Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting: Changes in National Cost Estimates 

Associated with the Proposed Notice of Revisions 

On October 30, 2009, EPA promulgated the final rule titled: Mandatory Reporting of 

Greenhouse Gases (74 FR 56259), under the authority of Sections 114 and 208 of the Clean Air 

Act. The final rule (Part 98) requires reporting of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other 

relevant information from certain sources in the economy. Data collection begins in the 2010 

calendar year with the first reports submitted by March 31, 2011, and annually thereafter by that 

deadline. 

Following publication of the rule, EPA has been working closely with owners and operators of 

facilities subject to the rule to communicate reporting requirements. Through these discussions, 

EPA has identified specific sections of the final rule that were either not clear, or did not have 

the intended effect. EPA is proposing to amend specific provisions in the greenhouse gas 

reporting rule to resolve issues and questions raised during implementation, and to correct 

technical and editorial errors that have been identified since publication. This memorandum 

documents changes in the national cost estimates associated with the proposed notice. 

Additional First-Year Cost Associated with the Review of Revisions 

Provisions 

During the first year of the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP), EPA anticipates all 

reporting facilities would need to review the amended provisions associated with the notice of 

revisions. To estimate these costs, EPA assumes an additional 3 hour burden for an industrial 

manager using the loaded labor rate for an industrial manager ($71.03)1. Multiplying the cost 

per facility (3 × $71.03 = $213.09) by the estimated affected population, the total additional first 

year costs are estimated to be $2.5 million (2006$). 

 

1 A complete description of the labor categories and labor cost methodology is described in Regulatory Impact Analysis for the 

Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Final Rule (GHG Reporting) (EPA, 2009, p. 4-2 and 4-3). Available at: 

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/downloads09/GHG_RIA.pdf 
Table 1. Additional 1st Year Changes Associated with Review of Revisions Provisions 

(million, 2006$) 

 Number of Facilities 

Final MRR 10,152 

F-Gas: Subparts I, L, OO, SS 398 

Subpart RR: 89 

Subparts: T, FF, TT, and II: 1,082 

Total Population Affected: 11,721 

 Cost per facility (3 hours × $71.03) $213.09 

Total 1st Year Costs: $2.5 million 

Subpart NN: Local natural gas distribution companies (LDCs) 

EPA proposes to amend Part 98 to require all LDCs that deliver 460,000 thousand standard cubic 

feet (mscf) or more of natural gas per year to be required to report. EPA proposes this capacitybased threshold because a capacity-based threshold would be more familiar to LDCs. Owners 

and operators of LDCs know how much natural gas they deliver to their customers and it would, 

therefore, be easier for facilities to determine if they are subject to the rule, than if the threshold 

were emissions-based. The proposed threshold is approximately equivalent to 25,000 mtCO2e. 

Under the new reporting threshold, the number of covered LDCs falls by 848 facilities (1,207 to 

359.) EPA anticipates many of these facilities are potentially small entities; as a result, the new 

threshold will likely reduce the number of small entities covered under Part 98. In the 

Regulatory Impact Analysis for the Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Final 

Rule2, the estimated reporting cost per facility was approximately: 

 

2 Available at: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/ghgrulemaking.html. 
First Year: ($2,600 +1,700) = $4,300 

Subsequent Years: ($1,300 + 1,700) = $3,000 

This implies the following reductions in the national cost estimates: 

First Year: 848 × 4,300 = $3.6 million and 

Subsequent Years: 848 × 3,000 = $2.5 million. 

Subpart C: Tier 4 Requirements for Units that Combust Greater than 

250 Tons of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) per Day 

In Part 98, EPA finalized a threshold of 250 tons per day of MSW, along with the requisite 

monitors to determine who had to follow Tier 4, versus who could use Tier 2. Units greater than 

250 tons of MSW per day, that have a gas monitor of any kind, or a flow monitor, or both, and 

meet the other requirements in 98.33(b)(4)(ii) were required to use Tier 4. Units equal to or less 

than 250 tons of MSW per day, that have a flow monitor and a CO2 concentration monitor, and 

meet the other conditions in 98.33(b)(4)(iii) also had to use Tier 4. The 250 tons per day 

threshold was based on New Source Performance Standards (NSPS). Upon further 

consideration, EPA determined that although the threshold may be appropriate for NSPS that 

does not necessarily mean it is appropriate for a GHG reporting program. Based on these 

concerns, EPA proposes to amend Part 98 to change the 250 tons per day threshold to 600 tons 

per day, based on EPA analysis that this value is approximately equivalent to the 250 mmBtu/hr 

heat input requirements for other large stationary combustion units (please see the Background 

Technical Support Document for Revisions EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0508). Units that do not meet 

the 600 tons per day trigger, and do not have the requisite monitors, could use Tier 2. EPA 

believes that this proposal still meets the desired goal to obtain high quality data from larger 

units, while not applying unnecessary burden. With this proposed amendment, general 

stationary combustion units will be subject to similar thresholds and conditions. 

Under the new threshold, EPA believes 87 general unspecified industrial combustion units will 

move from Tier 4 (CEMS-Add flow monitor only; $25,411 per unit first year and $18,090 per 

unit in subsequent years) to Tier 2 costs ($5,500 per unit)—a net reduction of $19,111 per unit 

and $12,590. This implies the following reductions in the national cost estimates: 

First Year: 87 × $19,111 = $1.7 million. 

Subsequent Years: 87 × $12,590 = $1.1 million. 

Summary National Cost Changes Associated with the Proposed Notice of Revisions 

As shown in Table 2, the National Cost estimates decline from $132.0 million to $129.2 million 

(two percent) in the first year and from $89.1 million to $85.5 million (4 percent) in subsequent 

years. 
Table 2. Summary of Cost Changes Associated with the Proposed Notice of Revision 

(million, 2006$) 

Variable First Year Subsequent Years 

Mandatory Reporting Rule 

National Cost Estimate 

(Private and Public) $132.0 $89.1 

 Review of Revision 

 Provisions $2.5 $0 

 Subpart NN Change —$3.6 —$2.5 

 Subpart C Change —$1.7 —$1.1 

Revised National Cost 

Estimate $129.2 $85.5

Other Amendments in Proposed Notice of Revisions 

EPA is proposing several other amendments to various provisions in Part 98. EPA has estimated 

that on the whole, these proposed revisions do not significantly change the overall costs of Part 

98. The other proposed amendments could be categorized as follows: 

 Proposed rule provides additional flexibility for reporters based on questions raised 

during implementation. 

 Proposal clarifies existing data reporting requirements. 

 Proposal would require facilities to report basic facility ID information that they already 

know. 

 Proposal requires reporters to report a data element for which there was a general 

recordkeeping requirement, but was not previously required to be reported. 

 Previously Part 98 required you to calculate something, but it was not required to be 

reported. Proposal requires the data element to now be reported. 

 Propose to delete reporting requirements in most subparts 

 Renumbering of data reporting elements in most subparts. 

See Appendix 1 for an elaboration on each of these changes and examples from the proposed 

rule. 
Appendix 1: Categories of Proposed Changes 

1. Clarification of existing data reporting requirements: There is currently a data 

reporting requirement in Part 98. However, based on perceived confusion among reporters, 

EPA is providing additional clarity on what was intended. There is no change in burden 

from these proposed changes. 

 

Requirement Change in Data Reporting Elements 

Subpart G: 98.76(b)(6) requires reporters to 

report the sampling results of carbon content of 

petroleum coke as determined for QA/QC of 

supplier data. 

The data reporting element is amended to 

clarify that the reporting element applies to 

feedstock, this may be petroleum coke, but 

there are also other potential feedstocks. 

Subpart C: 98.36(d)(1) requires that for 

stationary combustion units that either are 

subject to the Acid Rain Program or not in the 

Acid Rain Program but monitor and report CO2 

mass emissions year-round according to 40 

CFR part 75, reporters report certain unit level 

information. 

The data reporting element is amended to 

clarify that the reporting element applies to 

units subject to subpart D, which is a more 

simplified way of stating who the provision 

covers. 

2. Proposed rule provides additional flexibility for reporters based on questions raised 

during implementation. With the additional flexibility comes additional data reporting 

requirements, including identifying which approach the reporter is taking and any new data 

reporting elements associated with the new approach. Because the new approach is an 

option there is no increase in burden associated with implementing the option because 

reporters are not required to do so. 

Requirement Change in Data Reporting Elements 

Subpart C- 98.36(e)(2)- previous rule required 

facilities subject to use default HHVs found in 

Table C-1. We propose to provide additional 

flexibility to use site-specific HHVs. 

- new data reporting requirements to clarify 

that when you use a site-specific HHV, you 

must also report that HHV value. 

Subpart X- 98.243(c) (5)(i) – add the option to 

use standard conditions for the molar volume 

conversion of either: 849.5 scf per kg-mole at 

68 °F and 14.7 PSIA or 836.6 scf/kg-mole at 

- New data reporting element: report standard 

temperature at which gaseous feedstock and 

products volumes used were determined. 
60 °F and 14.7 PSIA). 

Subpart X- 98.246(a)- allow use of alternative 

methods than those listed under limited 

circumstances. The burden analysis estimated 

that they had to follow a method and indicate 

which method they used. 

- new data reporting element to report/provide 

the: name or title of analystical method, copy 

of the method and explanation of why 

alternative is needed. 

Subpart Y – 98.253(b)(1)(ii)(A) – add the 

option to calculate CO2 emissions from flares 

using a different equation. 

- New data reporting elements: the inputs to 

the new equation (e.g.,the number of carbon 

containing compounds other than CO2 in the 

flare gas stream) 

Subpart Y: 98.253(c)(2)(ii) – add an 

alternative option to calculate the exhaust flow 

rate of the fluid catalytic cracking unit 

regenerator. The new option allows the 

calculation to be performed using a nitrogen 

balance rather than an inert balance. 

New data reporting elements: the inputs to the 

new equation (e.g., 

Annual average flow rate of inlet air, Annual 

average flow rate of oxygen-enriched air) 

Subpart PP- 40 C.F.R. § 98.423(b)- add an 

option where CO2 is supplied in containers, 

that the reporter can use weigh bills, scales or 

load cells as an alternative to the flow meters. 

- Clarify existing reporting requirement- clarify 

that data could be reported from the flow meter 

or the mass of CO2 from CO2 streams that 

deliver CO2 to containers. 
3. Asking them to report basic facility ID information that they already know. These are 

new reporting requirements, but not new data collection efforts. This is common 

information, no assumed burden for data collection. The revisions would now just require 

them to report. 

Requirement Change in Data Reporting Elements 

Subpart A- Ask for basic information on 

facility, organization or entity reporting. 

- add general reporting requirements on 

1. Facility or supplier ID 

2. Organizational name (company 

affiliation/employer) for the designated 

representative 

3. Organizational name (company 

affiliation/employer) for the alternative 

designated representative 

Subpart C- Ask for unit ID information based 

on information already available in other 

programs. 

1. Add Acid Rain Program Indicator 

Subpart X- Ask for basic facility information Type of Petrochemical Produced 

Subpart Y- Asking for information on the type 

of sulfur recovery plant (e.g., non-Claus sulfur 

recovery) 

Description of the type of sulfur recovery 

plant. 

Subpart Y: Asking which of two options 

were chosen 

1. Asking whether daily or weekly 

measurement periods were used 

2. Asking which method was used to calculate 

emissions 

 
4. Require reporters to report a new data element for which there was a general 

recordkeeping requirement, but not listed in the respective subparts. These are new 

reporting requirements, but not new data collection efforts. The burden associated with 

collecting the data was accounted for in the ICR. The facilities would also have been 

required to retain the data as a record under the requirements of the specific subpart, or 

under the general recordkeeping requirements under 98.3(g). The revisions would now just 

require them to report. 

Requirement Change in Data Reporting Elements 

Subpart C- Requirement to add “methodology 

start date and end date”. Rule is clear under 

98.3(e) you needed to provide a written 

explanation of why a change in methodology 

was required. We felt it necessary, for the 

purposes of verification, to make clear that this 

description of why, should include when the 

change actually takes place. 

- Add “methodology start date” and 

“methodology end date” 

Subpart X. Identify petrochemical unit ID98.3(g) (1) would have required the facility to 

report “a list of all units, operations, processes, 

and activities for which GHG emissions were 

calculated” 

- Add “Unit ID” 
5. Part 98 requires them to calculate something, but it was not required to be reported. 

These are new reporting requirements, but not new data collection efforts. The burden 

associated with collecting the data was accounted for in the ICR. The facilities would also 

have been required to retain the data as a record under the requirements of the specific 

subpart, or under the general recordkeeping requirements under 98.3(g). The revisions 

would now just require them to report. 

Requirement Change in Data Reporting 

Elements 

Subpart C- had to calculate the total heat input, by fuel, 

when implementing equation C-10 in the final rule. The 

heat input was not required to be reported. Although 

note that data would have been required to be retained 

under 98.3(g)(2). This proposal now requires them to 

report heat input. 

- 98.36(d)(1)- add data reporting 

requirement for “The total heat input 

from each fuel listed in Table C-2 

that was combusted during the year, 

expressed in MMBtu.” 

Subpart C- New proposal to report the number of units 

served by the common pipe. Before reporters had to 

report data on the common pipe, including the ID 

numbers of the units and the maximum rated heat 

capacity of each unit, but they didn’t actually have to 

report the number of units. Not a new data collection 

effort. 

- Number of units served by the 

common pipe. 

Subpart Y- Had to report whether you use a measured 

value, a unit-specific emission factor or a default, and 

you had to report several pieces of information about the 

unit-specific emission factor, if applicable. We 

inadvertently left out the requirement to report the unitspecific emission factor itself. We are now not 

proposing to change the calculation methods, but now 

have to report the data element. Note that they would 

have had to retain this emission factor as a 

recordkeeping requirement per 98.3(2). 

- 98.256- add data reporting elements 

for unit specific emission factors for 

CH4 and N2O. 
6. Other 

Requirement Change in Data Reporting Elements 

Subpart G: Industry felt it was important to 

add a reporting element on the quantity of CO2

supplied for onsite urea production, and the 

method use to quantify that CO2. This 

information is readily available from onsite 

process information needed for urea 

production, no data collection methods are 

required. 

CO2 from the steam reforming of a 

hydrocarbon or the gasification of solid and 

liquid raw material at the ammonia 

manufacturing process unit used to produce 

urea and the method used to determine the 

CO2 consumed in urea production. 

Subpart OO- Have to submit a one time 

report that describes the concentration of each 

fluorinated GHG constituent in each 

fluorinated GHG product. 

6. Propose to delete reporting requirements in most subparts- (Stationary Combustion, 

Electricity Generation, Ammonia Production, Nitric Acid Production, Petrochemical 

Production, Petroleum Refining, Suppliers of Industrial Gases)

7. Renumbering in most subparts of data reporting elements- resulting from the 

additions/deletions described above.