Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526-0076
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Data Elements Under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule; Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations
Posted Date: 2016-12-09T05:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 237 (Friday, December 9, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 89188-89274]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-28564]

[[Page 89187]]

Vol. 81

Friday,

No. 237

December 9, 2016

Part II

Environmental Protection Agency

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

40 CFR Part 98

2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for Data Elements 
Under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule; Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 81 , No. 237 / Friday, December 9, 2016 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 89188]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 98

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526; FRL-9954-42-OAR]
RIN 2060-AS60

2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for Data 
Elements Under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; notice of final action on reconsideration.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is amending specific 
provisions in the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule to streamline and 
improve implementation of the rule, to improve the quality and 
consistency of the data collected under the rule, and to clarify or 
provide minor updates to certain provisions that have been the subject 
of questions from reporting entities. This action also finalizes 
confidentiality determinations for certain data elements. In addition, 
this is the final action on reconsideration in response to a Petition 
for Reconsideration regarding specific aspects of the Greenhouse Gas 
Reporting Rule.

DATES: This rule is effective on January 1, 2017, except for amendatory 
instructions 3, 5, 6, 8, 10 through 25, 31 through 34, 36, 38 through 
44, 46 through 50, 55 through 61, 63, 64, and 69 through 92, which are 
effective on January 1, 2018; and amendatory instructions 35, 37, 45, 
51 through 54, which are effective on January 1, 2019.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in 40 
CFR 98.7(l) and 40 CFR 98.324 is approved by the Director of the 
Federal Register as of January 1, 2017. The incorporation by reference 
of certain publications listed in 40 CFR 98.7(e), 40 CFR 98.34, and 40 
CFR 98.36 is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of 
January 1, 2018.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under 
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526. All documents in the docket are 
listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the 
index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential 
business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted 
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available 
only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available 
either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 
the Air Docket, EPA/DC, William Jefferson Clinton Building (WJC) West 
Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. This 
Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public 
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744 and the telephone number for the Air 
Docket is (202) 566-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carole Cook, Climate Change Division, 
Office of Atmospheric Programs (MC-6207J), Environmental Protection 
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone 
number: (202) 343-9334; fax number: (202) 343-2342; email address: 
GHGReporting@epa.gov.
    Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket, 
an electronic copy of this final rule will also be available through 
the WWW at www.regulations.gov. Following the Administrator's 
signature, a copy of this action will be posted on the EPA's Greenhouse 
Gas Reporting Program Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Regulated entities. These final revisions affect entities that must 
submit annual greenhouse gas (GHG) reports under the Greenhouse Gas 
Reporting Program (GHGRP) (40 CFR part 98). This final rule will impose 
on entities across the U.S. a degree of reporting consistency for 
Greenhouse Gas Emissions from most sectors of the economy and therefore 
is ``nationally applicable'' within the meaning of section 307(b)(1) of 
the Clean Air Act (CAA). Further, the Administrator has determined that 
rules codified in 40 CFR part 98 are subject to the provisions of CAA 
section 307(d). See CAA section 307(d)(1)(V) (the provisions of section 
307(d) apply to ``such other actions as the Administrator may 
determine''). These are amendments to existing regulations and will 
affect owners or operators of certain suppliers and direct emitters of 
GHGs. Regulated categories and entities include, but are not limited 
to, those listed in Table 1 of this preamble:

           Table 1--Examples of Affected Entities by Category
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Examples of affected
           Category                   NAICS             facilities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Stationary Fuel         ................  Facilities operating
 Combustion Sources.                               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.
Acid Gas Injection Projects...  211111 or 211112  Projects that inject
                                                   acid gas containing
                                                   CO2 underground.
Adipic Acid Production........            325199  Adipic acid
                                                   manufacturing
                                                   facilities.
Aluminum Production...........            331312  Primary aluminum
                                                   production
                                                   facilities.
Ammonia Manufacturing.........            325311  Anhydrous and aqueous
                                                   ammonia manufacturing
                                                   facilities.
CO2 Enhanced Oil and Gas                     211  Oil and gas extraction
 Recovery Projects.                                projects using CO2
                                                   enhanced oil and gas
                                                   recovery.
Electrical Equipment Use......            221121  Electric bulk power
                                                   transmission and
                                                   control facilities.
Electronics Manufacturing.....            334111  Microcomputers
                                                   manufacturing
                                                   facilities.

[[Page 89189]]

 
                                          334413  Semiconductor,
                                                   photovoltaic (solid-
                                                   state) device
                                                   manufacturing
                                                   facilities.
                                          334419  LCD unit screens
                                                   manufacturing
                                                   facilities. MEMS
                                                   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             325120  Chlorodifluoromethane
 Destruction.                                      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.
Lime Production...............            327410  Calcium oxide, calcium
                                                   hydroxide, dolomitic
                                                   hydrates
                                                   manufacturing
                                                   facilities.
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.
Phosphoric Acid Production....            325312  Phosphoric acid
                                                   manufacturing
                                                   facilities.
Petroleum Refineries..........            324110  Petroleum refineries.
Pulp and Paper Manufacturing..            322110  Pulp mills.
                                          322121  Paper mills.
                                          322130  Paperboard mills.
Municipal Solid Waste                     562212  Solid waste landfills.
 Landfills.
                                          221320  Sewage treatment
                                                   facilities.
Soda Ash Manufacturing........            325181  Alkalies and chlorine
                                                   manufacturing
                                                   facilities.
                                          212391  Soda ash, natural,
                                                   mining and/or
                                                   beneficiation.
Suppliers of Coal Based                   211111  Coal liquefaction at
 Liquids Fuels.                                    mine sites.
Suppliers of Petroleum                    324110  Petroleum refineries.
 Products.
Suppliers of Natural Gas and              221210  Natural gas
 NGLs.                                             distribution
                                                   facilities.
                                          211112  Natural gas liquid
                                                   extraction
                                                   facilities.
Suppliers of Industrial                   325120  Industrial gas
 Greenhouse Gases.                                 manufacturing
                                                   facilities.
Suppliers of Carbon Dioxide...            325120  Industrial gas
                                                   manufacturing
                                                   facilities.
Underground Coal Mines........            212113  Underground anthracite
                                                   coal mining
                                                   operations.
                                          212112  Underground bituminous
                                                   coal mining
                                                   operations.
Industrial Wastewater                     322110  Pulp mills.
 Treatment.
                                          322121  Paper mills.
                                          322122  Newsprint mills.
                                          322130  Paperboard mills.
                                          311611  Meat processing
                                                   facilities.
                                          311411  Frozen fruit, juice,
                                                   and vegetable
                                                   manufacturing
                                                   facilities.
                                          311421  Fruit and vegetable
                                                   canning facilities.
                                          325193  Ethanol manufacturing
                                                   facilities.
                                          324110  Petroleum refineries.
Industrial Waste Landfills....            562212  Solid waste landfills.
                                          221320  Sewage treatment
                                                   facilities.
                                          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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 1 of this preamble is not intended to be exhaustive, but 
rather provides a guide for readers regarding facilities likely to be 
affected by this action. Other types of facilities than those listed in 
the table could also be subject to reporting requirements. To determine 
whether you are affected by this action, you should carefully examine 
the applicability criteria found in 40 CFR part 98, subpart A or the 
relevant criteria in the sections related to industrial gas suppliers 
and direct emitters of GHGs. If you have questions regarding the 
applicability of this action to a particular facility, consult the 
person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 
Many facilities that are affected by 40 CFR part 98 have GHG emissions 
from multiple source categories listed in Table 1 of this preamble.
    What is the effective date? As proposed, the EPA will phase in the 
final amendments over the 2016, 2017, and 2018 reports in order to 
stagger the implementation of these revisions over several years. The 
effective dates listed in the DATES section of this preamble reflect 
when the amendments will be published in the CFR. The first set of 
amendments in this final rule is effective on January 1, 2017. These 
amendments include several amendments to subpart A (General 
Provisions), all amendments to subpart

[[Page 89190]]

I (Electronics Manufacturing), all amendments to subpart HH (Municipal 
Solid Waste Landfills), and one amendment to subpart FF (Underground 
Coal Mines). Further explanation of these amendments and their 
effective date is in sections I.E, III.A, III.F, III.R, and III.S of 
this preamble. Section 553(d) of the Administrative Procedure Act 
(APA), 5 U.S.C. Chapter 5, generally provides that rules may not take 
effect earlier than 30 days after they are published in the Federal 
Register. The EPA is issuing this final rule under section 307(d)(1) of 
the Clean Air Act, which states: ``The provisions of section 553 
through 557 * * * of Title 5 shall not, except as expressly provided in 
this section, apply to actions to which this subsection applies.'' 
Thus, section 553(d) of the APA does not apply to this rule. The EPA is 
nevertheless acting consistently with the purposes underlying APA 
section 553(d) in making the first set of amendments to this rule 
effective on January 1, 2017. Section 553(d) allows an effective date 
less than 30 days after publication for a rule that ``grants or 
recognizes an exemption or relieves a restriction'' or ``as otherwise 
provided by the agency for good cause found and published with the 
rule.'' As explained below, the EPA finds that there is good cause for 
the first set of amendments to this rule to become effective on January 
1, 2017, even though this may result in an effective date fewer than 30 
days from date of publication in the Federal Register.
    Judicial Review. Under CAA section 307(b)(1), judicial review of 
this final rule is available only by filing a petition for review in 
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (the 
Court) by February 7, 2017. Under CAA section 307(d)(7)(B), only an 
objection to this final rule that was raised with reasonable 
specificity during the period for public comment can be raised during 
judicial review. Section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA also provides a 
mechanism for the EPA to convene a proceeding for reconsideration, 
``[i]f the person raising an objection can demonstrate to EPA that it 
was impracticable to raise such objection within [the period for public 
comment] or if the grounds for such objection arose after the period 
for public comment (but within the time specified for judicial review) 
and if such objection is of central relevance to the outcome of the 
rule.'' Any person seeking to make such a demonstration to us should 
submit a Petition for Reconsideration to the Office of the 
Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, Room 3000, Ariel Rios 
Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460, with a copy 
to the person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section, and the Associate General Counsel for the Air and Radiation 
Law Office, Office of General Counsel (Mail Code 2344A), Environmental 
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20004. 
Note that under CAA section 307(b)(2), the requirements established by 
this final rule may not be challenged separately in any civil or 
criminal proceedings brought by the EPA to enforce these requirements.
    Acronyms and Abbreviations. The following acronyms and 
abbreviations are used in this document.

ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
BAMM Best Available Monitoring Methods
CAA Clean Air Act
CAS Chemical Abstracts Service
CBI Confidential business information
CEMS Continuous emission monitoring system
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CH4 Methane
CO2 Carbon dioxide
CO2e Carbon dioxide equivalent
CP Common Pipe
DCU Delayed coking unit
DE Destruction efficiency
DRE Destruction or removal efficiency
EDC Ethylene dichloride
e-GGRT Electronic Greenhouse Gas Reporting Tool
EF Emission factor
EIA Energy Information Administration
EO Executive Order
ER Enhanced oil and gas recovery
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
F-GHG Fluorinated greenhouse gas
FR Federal Register
GHG Greenhouse gas
GHGRP Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program
GP Aggregation of units
GWP Global warming potential
Hg Mercury
HHV High heat value
HTF Heat transfer fluid
ICR Information Collection Request
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
ISBN International Standard Book Number
IVT Inputs Verification Tool
kg Kilograms
LDC Local distribution company
mmBtu/hr Million British thermal units per hour
mmcfd Million cubic feet per day
MDRS Mine Data Retrieval System
MSHA Mine Safety and Health Administration
MSW Municipal solid waste
mtCO2e Metric tons of CO2 equivalents
N2O Nitrous oxide
NGL Natural gas liquid
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
OAQPS Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
ODS Ozone-depleting substances
OMB Office of Management and Budget
PRA Paperwork Reduction Act
PFC Perfluorocarbon
psig Pounds per square inch gauge
QA/QC Quality assurance/quality control
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
RY Reporting year
SF6 Sulfur hexafluoride
U.S. United States
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
VCM Vinyl chloride monomer

Table of Contents

I. Background
    A. How is this preamble organized?
    B. Executive Summary
    C. Background on This Final Rule
    D. Legal Authority
    E. When will the final amendments become effective?
    1. Amendments That Are Effective on January 1, 2017
    2. Amendments That Are Effective January 1, 2018
    3. Amendments That Are Effective January 1, 2019
    F. Where can I get a copy of information related to the final 
rule?
    G. Material Incorporated by Reference
II. Overview of Final Revisions to Part 98
III. Final Revisions to Each Subpart and Responses to Public Comment
    A. Subpart A--General Provisions
    1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart A
    2. Summary of Comments and Responses on Subpart A
    3. When the Final Revisions to Subpart A Become Effective
    B. Subpart C--General Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources
    1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart C
    2. Summary of Comments and Responses on Subpart C
    3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart C Become Effective
    C. Subpart E--Adipic Acid Production
    1. Revisions To Subpart E to Streamline Implementation
    2. Revisions to Subpart E To Improve the Quality of Data 
Collected Under Part 98 and Improve the U.S. GHG Inventory
    3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart E Become Effective
    D. Subpart F--Aluminum Production
    E. Subpart G--Ammonia Manufacturing
    1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart G
    2. Summary of Comments and Responses on Subpart G
    F. Subpart I--Electronics Manufacturing
    1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart I
    2. Summary of Comments and Responses on Subpart I
    3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart I Become Effective
    G. Subpart N--Glass Production
    H. Subpart O--HCFC-22 Production and HFC-23 Destruction
    1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart O
    2. Summary of Comments and Responses on Subpart O

[[Page 89191]]

    3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart O Become Effective
    I. Subpart Q--Iron and Steel Production
    J. Subpart S--Lime Manufacturing
    1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart S
    2. Summary of Comments and Response on Subpart S
    3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart S Become Effective
    K. Subpart V--Nitric Acid Production
    1. Revisions to Subpart V To Streamline Implementation
    2. Revisions to Subpart V To Improve the Quality of Data 
Collected Under Part 98
    3. When the Revisions to Subpart V Become Effective
    L. Subpart X--Petrochemical Production
    1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart X
    2. Summary of Comments and Responses on Subpart X
    3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart X Become Effective
    M. Subpart Y--Petroleum Refineries
    1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart Y
    2. Summary of Comments and Responses
    3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart Y Become Effective
    N. Subpart Z--Phosphoric Acid Production
    O. Subpart AA--Pulp and Paper Manufacturing
    P. Subpart CC--Soda Ash Manufacturing
    1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart CC
    2. Summary of Comments and Responses on Subpart CC
    3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart CC Become Effective
    Q. Subpart DD--Use of Electric Transmission and Distribution 
Equipment
    1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart DD
    2. Summary of Comments and Responses on Subpart DD
    3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart DD Become Effective
    R. Subpart FF--Underground Coal Mines
    1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart FF
    2. Summary of Comments and Responses on Subpart FF
    3.When the Final Amendments to Subpart FF Become Effective
    S. Subpart HH--Municipal Solid Waste Landfills
    1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart HH
    2. Summary of Comments and Responses
    3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart HH Become Effective
    T. Subpart II--Industrial Wastewater Treatment
    1. Revisions to Subpart II To Improve the Quality of Data 
Collected Under Part 98 and Improve the U.S. GHG Inventory
    2. Other Amendments to Subpart II
    3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart II Become Effective
    U. Subpart LL--Suppliers of Coal-Based Liquid Fuels
    V. Subpart NN--Suppliers of Natural Gas and Natural Gas Liquids
    W. Subpart OO--Suppliers of Industrial Greenhouse Gases
    1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart OO
    2. Summary of Comments and Responses on Subpart OO
    3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart OO Become Effective
    X. Subpart PP--Suppliers of Carbon Dioxide
    Y. Subpart RR--Geologic Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide
    Z. Subpart TT--Industrial Waste Landfills
    1. Revisions to Subpart TT To Improve the Quality of Data 
Collected Under Part 98
    2. Summary of Comments and Responses on Subpart TT
    3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart TT Become Effective
    AA. Other Minor Revisions, Clarifications, and Corrections
IV. Final Confidentiality Determinations for New or Substantially 
Revised Data Reporting Elements or Other Part 98 Reporting Elements 
for Which No Determination Has Been Previously Established
    A. EPA's Format for Proposing and Finalizing Categorical 
Confidentiality Determinations for New or Substantially Revised Data 
Reporting Elements Assigned to Data Categories With Categorical 
Confidentiality Determinations
    B. Final Confidentiality Determinations for New or Substantially 
Revised Data Reporting Elements
    1. Summary of Final Confidentiality Determinations
    2. Response to Public Comments on Proposed Confidentiality 
Determinations
    C. Final Confidentiality Determinations for Other Part 98 Data 
Reporting Elements for Which No Determination Has Been Previously 
Established
    1. Summary of Final CBI Determinations
    2. Response to Comments on Proposed Confidentiality 
Determinations
V. Impacts of the Final Amendments
    A. How was the incremental burden of the final rule estimated?
    1. Burden Associated With the Revision of Reporting Requirements
    2. Burden Associated With Revisions That Affect Applicability
    B. Additional Impacts of the Proposed Revisions to Part 98
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and 
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations
    K. Congressional Review Act

I. Background

A. How is this preamble organized?

    The first section of this preamble contains background information 
regarding the origin of the final amendments. This section also 
discusses the EPA's legal authority under the CAA to promulgate 
(including subsequent amendments to) the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule, 
codified at 40 CFR part 98 (hereinafter referred to as ``Part 98'') and 
the EPA's legal authority to make confidentiality determinations for 
new or revised data elements required by this amendment or for existing 
data elements for which a confidentiality determination has not 
previously been proposed. Section I of this preamble also discusses 
when the final amendments will apply and provides additional 
information regarding materials referenced in this rulemaking. Section 
II of this preamble describes the types of final amendments included in 
this rulemaking. Section III of this preamble is organized by Part 98 
subpart and contains detailed information on the final revisions to 
each subpart. It also describes the major changes made to each source 
category since proposal and provides a brief summary of significant 
public comments and the EPA's responses on issues specific to each 
source category. Section IV of this preamble discusses the final 
confidentiality determinations for new or substantially revised (i.e., 
requiring additional or different data to be reported) data reporting 
elements, as well as for certain existing data elements in subparts I, 
Z, MM, and NN. Section V of this preamble discusses the impacts of the 
final amendments. Finally, section VI of this preamble describes the 
statutory and executive order requirements applicable to this action.

B. Executive Summary

    The EPA is finalizing the proposed revisions to Part 98, with some 
changes made in response to public comments. The final revisions 
include amendments to the calculation, monitoring, reporting, and 
recordkeeping requirements of Part 98 as follows:
     Revisions to streamline implementation and reduce burden. 
Such revisions include revising requirements to focus EPA and reporter 
resources on relevant data, removing reporting requirements for 
specific facilities that report little to no

[[Page 89192]]

emissions, or removing reported data elements that are no longer 
necessary.
     Amendments to improve quality of data. These amendments 
ensure that accurate data are being collected under the rule and expand 
monitoring or reporting requirements that are necessary to improve 
verification and improve the accuracy of data used to inform the 
Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks (hereafter 
referred to as the ``U.S. GHG Inventory''). In some cases, the EPA is 
changing the proposed amendments in this final rule to reduce the 
burden to reporters (e.g., not finalizing certain proposed revisions to 
reporting or monitoring requirements).
     Minor amendments to better reflect industry processes and 
emissions, including amendments to calculation, monitoring, or 
measurement methods that address prior petitioner or commenter concerns 
(e.g., amendments that provide additional flexibility for facilities or 
that more accurately reflect industry processes and emissions).
     Minor clarifications and corrections to improve 
understanding of the rule, including corrections to errors in terms and 
definitions in certain equations; clarifications that provide 
additional information for reporters to better or more fully understand 
compliance obligations; changes to correct cross references within and 
between subparts; and other editorial or harmonizing changes.
    This action also finalizes confidentiality determinations for the 
reporting of certain data elements added or substantially revised in 
these final amendments, and for certain existing data elements for 
which no confidentiality determination has been made previously.\1\ 
Finally, section III.S of this preamble describes final amendments in 
response to a Petition for Reconsideration of specific aspects of 
subpart HH, which applies to municipal solid waste landfills.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ During the development of Part 98, the EPA received a number 
of comments from stakeholders regarding their concern that some of 
the data reported consisted of confidential business information 
that, if released to the public, would likely harm their competitive 
position. The EPA has subsequently published a series of notices to 
establish determinations for the confidentiality status of data 
required to be reported under the GHGRP (i.e., ``confidentiality 
determinations''). See section IV.A of this preamble for additional 
information.
    \2\ Waste Management Petition for Reconsideration of 2013 
Revisions to Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule and Final Confidentiality 
Determinations for New or Substantially Revised Data Elements. 
Available in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These final amendments are anticipated to increase burden for Part 
98 reporters in cases where the amendments expand current 
applicability, monitoring, or reporting, and are anticipated to 
decrease burden for reporters in cases where they streamline Part 98 to 
remove notification or reporting requirements or simplify the data that 
must be reported. The estimated incremental change in burden from these 
amendments to Part 98 includes burden associated with: (1) Changes to 
the reporting requirements by adding, revising, or removing existing 
reporting requirements; and (2) revisions to the applicability of 
subparts such that additional facilities will be required to report. 
The EPA is not finalizing proposed revisions to the monitoring 
requirements for underground coal mines that would have significantly 
increased the burden for these reporters. The EPA has also adjusted the 
burden for the collection of certain data from subpart C (General 
Stationary Combustion) reporters to better reflect the activities 
performed in the collection of the data. The remaining amendments that 
the EPA is finalizing in this action are not anticipated to have a 
significant impact on burden.
    As discussed in section I.E of this preamble, we are implementing 
these changes in stages for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 reports in order 
to stagger the implementation of these changes over time. The burden 
has been determined based on which revisions will be implemented for a 
given set of reports (e.g., the burden for reporting year (RY) 2016 
reports only reflects changes to subparts I (Electronics Manufacturing) 
and HH (Municipal Solid Waste Landfills), some of the changes to 
subpart A (General Provisions), and one of the changes to subpart FF 
(Underground Coal Mines)). The EPA determined that one-time 
implementation costs will be incurred for certain revisions to 
applicability and monitoring requirements that will first apply to 
RY2017 and RY2018; therefore, we have estimated costs through RY2019 to 
reflect the subsequent annual costs incurred by industry. As more fully 
explained in section V of this preamble, the EPA has determined that 
the total estimated incremental burden associated with all revisions in 
this final rulemaking will be $636,124 over the three years covered by 
this final rule, with an estimated annual burden of $189,150 per year 
once all changes have been implemented. The incremental implementation 
costs for each reporting year are summarized in Table 2 of this 
preamble.

                            Table 2--Incremental Burden for Reporting Years 2016-2019
                                                    [$/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Reporting year                       2016             2017             2018             2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Annual Cost (all subparts)............             $5K            $407K            $224K            $190K
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Background on This Final Rule

    The GHG Reporting Rule was published in the Federal Register on 
October 30, 2009 (74 FR 56260). The final rule became effective on 
December 29, 2009 and requires reporting of GHGs from various 
facilities and suppliers, consistent with the 2008 Consolidated 
Appropriations Act.\3\ The EPA issued additional rules in 2010 
finalizing the requirements for subpart T--Magnesium Production, 
subpart FF--Underground Coal Mines, subpart II--Industrial Wastewater 
Treatment, and subpart TT--Industrial Waste Landfills (75 FR 39736, 
July 12, 2010); subpart I--Electronics Manufacturing, subpart L--
Fluorinated Gas Production, subpart DD--Electrical Transmission and 
Distribution Equipment Use, subpart QQ--Importers and Exporters of 
Fluorinated GHGs Contained in Pre-Charged Equipment or Closed-Cell 
Foams, and subpart SS--Electrical Equipment Manufacture or 
Refurbishment (75 FR 74774, December 1, 2010); and subpart RR--Geologic 
Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide and subpart UU--Injection of Carbon 
Dioxide (75 FR 75060, December 1, 2010). Following the promulgation of 
these subparts, the EPA finalized several technical and clarifying 
amendments to these and other subparts under the GHGRP. A number of 
subparts have been revised since promulgation (75 FR

[[Page 89193]]

79092, December 17, 2010; 76 FR 73866, November 29, 2011; 77 FR 10373, 
February 22, 2012; 77 FR 29935, May 21, 2012; 77 FR 51477, August 24, 
2012; 78 FR 68162, November 13, 2013; 78 FR 71904, November 29, 2013; 
79 FR 63750, October 24, 2014; and 79 FR 73750, December 11, 2014). The 
amendments generally did not change the basic requirements of Part 98, 
but were intended to improve clarity and ensure consistency across the 
calculation, monitoring, and data reporting requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008, Public Law 110-161, 
121 Stat. 1844, 2128.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 15, 2016, the EPA proposed amendments to provisions in 
Part 98 in the ``2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for 
Data Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' (hereafter 
``Proposed 2015 Revisions'') (81 FR 2536). The EPA is finalizing those 
amendments and confidentiality determinations in this action, with 
certain changes since proposal following consideration of comments 
submitted. Responses to significant comments submitted on the proposed 
amendments can be found in sections III, IV, and V of this preamble.

D. Legal Authority

    The EPA is finalizing these rule amendments under its existing CAA 
authority provided in CAA section 114. As stated in the preamble to the 
2009 final GHG reporting rule (74 FR 56260), CAA section 114(a)(1) 
provides the EPA broad authority to require the information gathered by 
this rule because such data will inform and are relevant to the EPA's 
carrying out a wide variety of CAA provisions. See the preambles to the 
proposed and final GHG reporting rule for further information.
    In addition, the EPA is finalizing confidentiality determinations 
for new, revised, and existing data elements in Part 98 under its 
authorities provided in sections 114, 301, and 307 of the CAA. Section 
114(c) of the CAA requires that the EPA make publicly available 
information obtained under CAA section 114, except for information 
(excluding emission data) that qualifies for confidential treatment. 
The Administrator has determined that this final rule is subject to the 
provisions of section 307(d) of the CAA. Section 307(d) contains a set 
of procedures relating to the issuance and review of certain CAA rules.

E. When will the final amendments become effective?

    As proposed, the EPA will phase in the final amendments over the 
2016, 2017, and 2018 reports in order to stagger the implementation of 
these revisions over several years. The effective dates listed in the 
DATES section of this preamble reflect when the amendments will be 
published in the CFR. What these dates mean for practical purposes, 
that is, what reporters will need to do year-by-year, is detailed in 
sections I.E.1 through I.E.3 below and in the corresponding subpart-
specific sections in section III of this preamble. The amendments can 
be thought of in two categories. In general, amendments in the first 
category add applicability (i.e. more facilities must report) or impact 
monitoring or calibration of meters such that a facility must change 
what they do to comply with the rule during the reporting year (January 
1 through December 31 of each year); these amendments will become 
effective starting on January 1 of that reporting year. Amendments in 
the second category change or clarify calculations, clarify provisions, 
amend reporting requirements, or correct mistakes to improve 
understanding of the rule, but do not result in any changes to 
monitoring, calibration, or applicability; these amendments will become 
effective on the January 1 immediately following the relevant reporting 
year. Amendments in the second category affect what must be done to 
prepare the reports during the year of the report submission but do not 
affect any actions the facilities needed to have taken during the 
reporting year.
1. Amendments That Are Effective on January 1, 2017
    Table 3 of this preamble lists the affected subparts, the final 
revisions that are effective on January 1, 2017, and the RY report in 
which those changes will first be reflected. January 1, 2017, is the 
effective date, which is the date that the CFR regulatory text is 
revised to reflect those changes. However, the report in which that 
amendment will first be reflected is either RY2016 or RY2017, depending 
upon the substance of that change, as in what that change requires the 
reporter to do to comply with it.
    Changes with effective date January 1, 2017, that will be reflected 
starting with the RY2016 report are those that require no changes to be 
made by reporters during the reporting year, but rather are 
clarifications, corrections, or changes to reporting requirements, 
i.e., changes the reporter must comply with in preparation of the 
report. These changes with effective date January 1, 2017, will 
therefore apply to and will be reflected in RY2016 reports that are 
submitted in 2017. These changes do not impact applicability, 
monitoring, or calibration of meters.
    More specifically, regarding the reasoning behind this timing, we 
are finalizing as proposed that all changes to subparts I and HH, and a 
minor revision to subpart A (the revised definition of ``Gas collection 
system or landfill gas collection system''), will apply to reports for 
RY2016, which must be submitted in 2017. We have determined that it is 
feasible for existing reporters to implement these changes to subparts 
A, I, and HH for RY2016 because these changes are consistent with the 
data collection and calculation methodologies in the current rule. The 
final revisions to these subparts do not add new monitoring 
requirements, and do not substantially affect the type of information 
that must be collected. No comments were received on the proposed 
effective date for revisions to these subparts.
    We are also finalizing that the amendments to 40 CFR 98.2(i)(3) and 
(5) and 40 CFR 98.3(h) are effective on January 1, 2017, and will apply 
starting with RY2016 reports. These amendments serve to reduce burden 
on reporters and are feasible to make effective as soon as possible, 
therefore they will be reflected starting with the RY2016 reports 
submitted in 2017. See section III.A.3 of this preamble for more detail 
on the timing of these final revisions.
    Changes with effective date January 1, 2017 that will be reflected 
starting with the RY2017 reports affect monitoring. Both the subpart A 
revision to 40 CFR 98.7(l)(1) and the subpart FF revision to 40 CFR 
98.324(b)(1) require use of the most recent Mine Safety and Health 
Administration (MSHA) Handbook entitled Coal Mine Safety and Health 
General Inspection Procedures Handbook Number: PH116-V-1, June 2016 
(MSHA Handbook). Under this final rule, reporters must use this MSHA 
Handbook for monitoring from January 1, 2017, through December 31, 
2017, and the resulting data must be used in the RY2017 report 
submitted in 2018. See section III.R.3 of this preamble for more detail 
on the timing of these revisions.

[[Page 89194]]

          Table 3--Part 98 Amendments Effective January 1, 2017
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Revisions
                                  Revisions reflected       reflected
     Subpart affected \a\        starting with RY2016     starting with
                                      reports \b\        RY2017 reports
                                                               \c\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A--General Provisions.........  Sec.   98.2(i)(3) and   Sec.
                                 (5); Sec.   98.3(h);    98.7(l)(1).
                                 Sec.   98.6
                                 (definition of ``Gas
                                 collection system or
                                 landfill gas
                                 collection system''
                                 only).
I--Electronics Manufacturing..  All changes in subpart  N/A.
FF--Underground Coal Mines....  N/A...................  Sec.
                                                         98.324(b)(1).
HH--Municipal Solid Waste       All changes in subpart  N/A.
 Landfills.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Subpart names may also be found in the Table of Contents for this
  preamble.
\b\ RY2016 reports will be submitted to the EPA by March 31, 2017.
\c\ RY2017 reports will be submitted to the EPA by April 2, 2018.

2. Amendments That Are Effective January 1, 2018
    Table 4 of this preamble lists the affected subparts and final 
amendments that are effective January 1, 2018 and the RY report in 
which those changes will first be reflected. January 1, 2018, is the 
date on which these amendments will appear in the CFR. However, the 
report for which that amendment will first be reflected is either 
RY2017 or RY2018, depending upon the substance of that change, as in 
what that change requires the reporter to do to comply with it. Changes 
that will be reflected starting with the RY2017 report are feasible for 
reporters to implement for RY2017 because these changes are consistent 
with the monitoring and data collection in the current rule. In most 
cases, the final revisions include minor revisions such as editorial 
corrections, corrections to cross-references, and technical 
clarifications regarding the existing regulatory requirements. Where 
calculation equations are proposed to be modified, the changes 
generally clarify terms in the emission calculation equations and do 
not materially affect monitoring requirements. In some cases, we are 
adding flexibility by providing alternative monitoring methods or 
missing data procedures that will reduce burden on reporters. Although 
some of the revisions included in Table 4 of this preamble will include 
reporting additional data, the EPA has determined that the data 
collected will be readily available to reporters.
    For a number of subparts all revisions are being finalized as 
proposed in this action. This is the case with the following subparts: 
E, F, N, O, P, Q, U, Z, AA, II, LL, MM, and UU.
    The changes in Table 4 of this preamble, that will be reflected 
starting in RY2018 reports submitted in 2019 are those that require new 
facilities to report to the GHGRP (40 CFR 98.220 in subpart V, all 
revisions to subpart OO, and related revisions to Table A-5) or that 
require calibration of meters (40 CFR 98.164(b)(1) in subpart P). We 
are making these revisions effective January 1, 2018, so that the new 
reporters for subparts V and OO, and subpart P reporters that have not 
already calibrated their meters according to these requirements, will 
take the necessary action to begin monitoring or calibrate meters to be 
in full compliance with these revisions throughout RY2018.
    In past rulemakings, the EPA has typically required monitoring to 
begin a few months after finalization of revised rules, and has offered 
Best Available Monitoring Methods (BAMM) to be used temporarily to 
provide sufficient time for facilities to come into full compliance 
with the newly finalized monitoring methods. In this action, to avoid 
the need to offer the use of BAMM and to stagger the burden associated 
with making revisions to the EPA's electronic Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Tool (e-GGRT), we are finalizing the revisions to these subparts to be 
effective January 1, 2018, and apply to RY2018 reports. Subparts P, V, 
and OO reporters, including new reporters, will begin following the 
revised rule requirements on January 1, 2018, and submit the first 
annual reports using the revised monitoring and data collection methods 
on March 31, 2019. This schedule allows at least one year for subpart 
P, V, and OO reporters to acquire, install, and calibrate any new 
monitoring equipment, as well as implement any changes to existing 
monitoring methods, for RY2018.

          Table 4--Part 98 Amendments Effective January 1, 2018
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Revisions
                                  Revisions reflected       reflected
     Subpart affected \a\        starting with RY2017     starting with
                                      Reports \b\        RY2018 reports
                                                               \b\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A--General Provisions.........  Sec.   98.2 (except     Table A-5.
                                 Sec.   98.2(i)(3));
                                 Sec.   98.3 (except
                                 Sec.   98.3(h)); Sec.
                                   98.4; Sec.   98.6
                                 (except definition of
                                 ``Gas collection
                                 system or landfill
                                 gas collection
                                 system''); Sec.
                                 98.7(e)(33); and
                                 Tables A-3 and A-4.
C--General Stationary Fuel      All changes in subpart  N/A.
 Combustion Sources.
E--Adipic Acid Production.....  All changes in subpart  N/A.
F--Aluminum Production........  All changes in subpart  N/A.
G--Ammonia Manufacturing......  All changes in subpart  N/A.
N--Glass Production...........  All changes in subpart  N/A.
O--HCFC-22 Production and HFC-  All changes in subpart  N/A.
 23 Destruction.
Q--Iron and Steel Production..  All changes in subpart  N/A.
P--Hydrogen Production........  N/A...................  Sec.
                                                         98.164(b)(1).
S--Lime Manufacturing.........  All changes in subpart  N/A.
U--Miscellaneous Uses of        All changes in subpart  N/A.
 Carbonate.
V--Nitric Acid Production.....  N/A...................  Sec.   98.220
                                                         and Sec.
                                                         98.223(a)(2).
X--Petrochemical Production...  All changes in subpart  N/A.
Z--Phosphoric Acid Production.  All changes in subpart  N/A.
AA--Pulp and Paper              All changes in subpart  N/A.
 Manufacturing.

[[Page 89195]]

 
CC--Soda Ash Manufacturing....  All changes in subpart  N/A.
DD--Use of Electric             All changes in subpart  N/A.
 Transmission and Distribution
 Equipment.
FF--Underground Coal Mines....  All changes in subpart  N/A.
                                 (except Sec.
                                 98.324(b)(1)).
II--Industrial Wastewater       All changes in subpart  N/A.
 Treatment.
LL--Suppliers of Coal-based     All changes in subpart  N/A.
 Liquid Fuels.
MM--Suppliers of Petroleum      All changes in subpart  N/A.
 Products.
NN--Suppliers of Natural Gas    All changes in subpart  N/A.
 and Natural Gas Liquids.
OO--Suppliers of Industrial     N/A...................  All changes in
 Greenhouse Gases.                                       subpart.
PP--Suppliers of Carbon         All changes in subpart  N/A.
 Dioxide.
TT--Industrial Waste landfills  All changes in subpart  N/A.
UU--Injection of Carbon         All changes in subpart  N/A.
 Dioxide.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Subpart names may also be found in the Table of Contents for this
  preamble.
\b\ RY2017 reports will be submitted to the EPA by April 2, 2018.
\c\ RY2018 reports will be submitted to the EPA by April 1, 2019.

3. Amendments That Are Effective January 1, 2019
    The revisions listed in Table 5 of this preamble will be effective 
January 1, 2019, and will be reflected starting with RY2018 reports, 
which must be submitted in 2019. January 1, 2019, is the date on which 
these amendments will appear in the CFR. All changes in Table 5 of this 
preamble are consistent with the data collection and monitoring in the 
current rule; therefore, the reporter does not need to take action 
during the reporting year. In most cases, the final revisions include 
minor revisions such as editorial corrections, corrections to cross-
references, and technical clarifications regarding the existing 
regulatory requirements. Where calculation equations are modified, the 
changes generally clarify terms in the emission calculation equations 
and do not materially affect monitoring requirements or how emissions 
are calculated. Although some of the revisions included in Table 5 of 
this preamble will include reporting additional data, the EPA has 
determined that the data collected will be readily available to 
reporters.
    In the case of subparts P and V, the amendments listed in Table 5 
of this preamble are effective January 1, 2019, whereas other 
amendments to these subparts, ones that affect applicability or 
calibration of meters, are effective one year earlier so that reporters 
can take action starting January 1, 2018, and the changes will be 
reflected in the RY2018 report (see Table 4 of this preamble). In the 
case of subpart Y, while no changes are being made to applicability or 
monitoring methods, the final amendments represent substantive changes 
to the calculation of emissions. These amendments will be effective 
January 1, 2019, and, as proposed, the changes will be reflected in the 
RY2018 report, in order to give reporters adequate time to become 
familiar with the new calculations and give the Agency time to make the 
necessary changes to e-GGRT for this subpart.

          Table 5--Part 98 Amendments Effective January 1, 2019
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Revisions reflected starting
           Subpart affected \a\               with RY2018  reports \b\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
P--Hydrogen Production....................  Sec.   98.163(b)(3) and all
                                             changes to Sec.   98.166.
V--Nitric Acid Production.................  Sec.   98.226(h).
Y--Petroleum Refineries...................  All changes in subpart.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Subpart names may also be found in the Table of Contents for this
  preamble.
\b\ RY2018 reports will be submitted to the EPA by April 1, 2019.

F. Where can I get a copy of information related to the final rule?

    This preamble references several documents developed to support the 
final rulemaking. These documents provide additional information 
regarding the final changes to Part 98, and supplementary information 
that the EPA considered in the development of the final revisions. 
These documents are referenced in sections II through V of this 
preamble and are available in the docket to this rulemaking or other 
rulemaking dockets, as follows:
     ``Final Table of 2015 Revisions to the Greenhouse Gas 
Reporting Rule.'' EPA memorandum summarizing the less substantive minor 
corrections, clarifications, and harmonizing revisions, as discussed in 
section II of this preamble. Available in the docket for this 
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526.
     ``Revised Emission Methodology for Delayed Coking Units.'' 
From Jeff Coburn, RTI to Brian Cook, EPA, dated June 4, 2015. 
Memorandum supporting final revisions to subpart Y (Petroleum 
Refineries) as discussed in section III.M of this preamble. Available 
in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526.
     ``Emission Estimation Protocol for Petroleum Refineries. 
Version 3.'' Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office 
of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. 
August 2015. Available at: https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/chief/efpac/protocol/ProtocolReport2015.pdf.
     ``U.S. Underground Coal Mine Ventilation Air Methane 
Exhaust Characterization'' (July 2010). Available in the docket for 
this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526.
     ``Identifying Opportunities for Methane Recovery at U.S. 
Coal Mines: Profiles of Selected Gassy Underground Coal Mines 2002-
2006.'' Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526.

[[Page 89196]]

     Waste Management Petition for Reconsideration of 2013 
Revisions to Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule and Final Confidentiality 
Determinations for New or Substantially Revised Data Elements. 
Available in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934.
     ``Review of Oxidation Studies and Associated Cover Depth 
in the Peer-Reviewed Literature.'' From Kate Bronstein, Meaghan 
McGrath, and Jeff Coburn, RTI to Rachel Schmeltz, EPA, dated June 17, 
2015, Memorandum supporting proposed revisions to subpart HH (Municipal 
Solid Waste Landfills) as discussed in section III.S of this preamble. 
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2015-0526.
     Refinery Demonstration of Optical Technologies for 
Measurement of Fugitive Emissions and for Leak Detection (Roy McArthur, 
Environment Canada, and Allan Chambers and Mel Strosher, Carbon and 
Energy Management, March 31, 2006). Available in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2015-0526.
     ``Measurement and Analysis of Benzene and VOC Emissions in 
the Houston Ship Channel Area and Selected Surrounding Major Stationary 
Sources Using DIAL (Differential Absorption Light Detection and 
Ranging) Technology to Support Ambient HAP Concentrations Reductions in 
the Community.'' Loren Raun & Dan W. Hoyt, Bur. Pollution Control & 
Prevention, City of Houston, 2011. Available in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2015-0526.
     Heath, L.S. et al. 2010. Greenhouse Gas and Carbon Profile 
of the U.S. Forest Products Industry Value Chain. Environmental Science 
and Technology 44(2010) 3999-4005. Available in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2015-0526.
     Letter to Leif Hockstad, U.S. EPA, from William C. Herz, 
National Lime Association re: Draft Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas 
Emissions and Sinks 1990-2012. Available in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2015-0526.
     National Lime Association comments on Inventory of U.S. 
Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks (78 FR 12013, February 22, 2013), 
Arline M. Seeger. Available in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526.
     ``Final Data Category Assignments and Confidentiality 
Determinations for Data Elements in the Proposed 2015 Revisions.'' 
Memorandum listing all final new, substantially revised, and existing 
data elements with final category assignments and confidentiality 
determinations, as described in section IV of this preamble. Available 
in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526.
     ``Summary of Evaluation of Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Program (GHGRP) Part 98 `Inputs to Emission Equations' Data Elements 
Deferred Until 2013.'' Memorandum, December 17, 2012. Available in the 
docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526.
     ``Assessment of Burden Impacts of Final 2015 Revisions to 
the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule.'' Memorandum describing the costs of 
the final revisions to Part 98, as discussed in section V of this 
preamble. Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526.

G. Material Incorporated by Reference

    In this final rulemaking, the EPA is including regulatory text for 
40 CFR 98.7 that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance 
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is incorporating by reference 
the following:
     Standard Test Methods for Determining the Biobased Content 
of Solid, Liquid, and Gaseous Samples using Radiocarbon Analysis (ASTM 
D6866-16), which will apply to subpart C reporters (see section III.B.2 
of this preamble). These standards are test methods that provide how to 
experimentally measure biobased carbon content of solids, liquids, and 
gaseous samples using radiocarbon analysis. These standards distinguish 
carbon resulting from contemporary biomass-based inputs from those 
derived from fossil-based inputs. These standards utilize accelerator 
mass spectrometry, isotope ratio mass spectrometry, and liquid 
scintillation counter techniques to quantify the biobased content of a 
product. Anyone may access the standards on the ASTM Web site 
(www.astm.org/) for additional information. These standards are 
available to everyone at a cost determined by the ASTM ($50). The ASTM 
also offers memberships or subscriptions that allow unlimited access to 
their methods. The cost of obtaining these methods is not a significant 
financial burden, making the methods reasonably available for 
reporters. The EPA will also make a copy of these documents available 
in hard copy at the appropriate EPA office (see the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information) for 
review purposes only.
     Inspection and sampling standards from the Coal Mine 
Safety and Health General Inspection Procedures Handbook Number: PH16-
V-1 (June 2016) as published by the Mine Safety and Health 
Administration (MSHA), which will apply to subpart FF reporters (see 
section III.R.2 of this preamble). This handbook provides general 
procedures for gathering samples of methane concentration from coal 
mines and making quarterly measurements of flow rate, temperature, 
pressure, and moisture content. The handbook is available free of 
charge through the MSHA Web site (www.msha.gov). The EPA has also made, 
and will continue to make, these documents available electronically 
through www.regulations.gov.
    Because these standards do not present a significant financial 
burden to reporters, the EPA has determined that these methods are 
reasonably available. The EPA has also made, and will continue to make, 
these documents generally available in hard copy at the appropriate EPA 
office (see the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 
preamble for more information).

II. Overview of Final Revisions to Part 98

    In the proposed rule, the EPA identified four categories of 
revisions that we are finalizing in this rulemaking, which include the 
following:
     Revisions to streamline implementation of the rule by 
reducing or simplifying requirements that ease burden on reporters and 
the EPA, such as revising requirements to focus GHGRP and reporter 
resources on relevant data, removing reporting requirements for 
specific facilities that report little to no emissions, or removing 
reported data elements that are no longer necessary.
     Amendments that expand monitoring, applicability, or 
reporting requirements that are necessary to enhance the quality of the 
data collected, improve verification of collected data under the GHGRP, 
and improve the accuracy of data included in the U.S. GHG Inventory.
     Other amendments, such as amendments to calculation, 
monitoring, or measurement methods that address prior petitioner or 
commenter concerns (e.g., amendments that provide additional 
flexibility for facilities or that more accurately reflect industry 
processes and emissions).
     Minor clarifications and corrections, including 
corrections to terms and definitions in certain equations; 
clarifications that provide additional information for reporters to 
better or more fully understand compliance obligations; changes to

[[Page 89197]]

correct cross references within and between subparts; and other 
editorial or harmonizing changes that improve the public's 
understanding of the rule.
    The final revisions in this action advance the EPA's goal of 
maximizing rule effectiveness. For example, these revisions clarify 
existing rule provisions, thus enabling government, regulated entities, 
and the public to easily identify and understand rule requirements. In 
addition, specific changes such as increasing the flexibility given to 
reporting entities related to requesting extensions for revising annual 
reports will make compliance easier than non-compliance. The changes 
also serve to clarify whether and when reporting requirements apply to 
a facility, and more specifically when a facility may discontinue 
reporting, therefore allowing a regulated entity to regularly assess 
their compliance and prevent non-compliance.
    The changes will also improve EPA's ability to assess compliance by 
adding reporting elements that allow the EPA to more thoroughly verify 
GHG data and understand trends in emissions. For example, the new 
requirement to report the date of installation of any abatement 
equipment at adipic acid and nitric acid production facilities will 
increase the EPA's and the public's understanding of the use of and 
trends in emissions reduction technologies. Lastly, the changes will 
further advance the ability of the GHGRP to provide access to quality 
data on greenhouse gas emissions by adding key data elements to improve 
the usefulness of the data. One example is the addition of the 
reporting of emissions by state for suppliers of natural gas (subpart 
NN reporters). These data will allow users of the GHGRP data to more 
easily identify the state within which the reporter operated, which 
will be useful for determining state-level GHG totals associated with 
natural gas supply and increase transparency and usefulness of the data 
reported.
    Section III of this preamble describes the specific changes in each 
of the above categories that we are finalizing for each subpart in more 
detail. Additional details for the specific final amendments for each 
subpart are summarized in the memorandum, ``Final Table of 2015 
Revisions to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' (hereafter referred to 
as the ``Final Table of Revisions'') available in the docket for this 
rulemaking (EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526). The Final Table of Revisions 
describes each final change within a subpart and includes minor 
revisions that were proposed but are not discussed in detail in this 
preamble (e.g., straightforward clarifications of requirements to 
better reflect the EPA's intent; harmonizing changes within subparts 
(such as changes in terminology); corrections to calculation terms and 
cross-references; editorial and minor error corrections; and removal of 
redundant text). The Final Table of Revisions provides the existing 
rule text, the finalized changes, and indications of which amendments 
are being finalized as proposed and which amendments differ from the 
proposal.

III. Final Revisions to Each Subpart and Responses to Public Comment

    This section summarizes the final substantive amendments for each 
Part 98 subpart, as generally described in section II of this preamble. 
The amendments to each subpart are followed by a summary of the major 
comments on those amendments, the EPA's responses to those comments, 
and a description of when the amendments become effective. Sections 
III.A through III.AA of this preamble also identify where additional 
minor corrections to a subpart are included in the Final Table of 
Revisions. A complete listing of all comments and the EPA's responses 
is located in the comment response document in Docket Id. No EPA-HQ-
OAR-2015-0526. Additional rationale for these amendments is available 
in the preamble to the proposed rule (81 FR 2536).

A. Subpart A--General Provisions

    In this action, we are finalizing several amendments, 
clarifications, and corrections to subpart A of Part 98. This section 
discusses the substantive changes to subpart A. We are finalizing as 
proposed all of the minor corrections and clarifications to subpart A 
presented in the Final Table of Revisions (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2015-0526). We are also finalizing confidentiality determinations 
for new data elements resulting from these revisions to subpart A; see 
section IV of this preamble and the memorandum ``Final Data Category 
Assignments and Confidentiality Determinations for Data Elements in the 
Proposed 2015 Revisions'' in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for 
additional information on the final category assignments and 
confidentiality determinations for these data elements.
    The EPA received several comments for subpart A. Substantive 
comments are addressed in section III.A.2 of this preamble; see the 
document ``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas 
Reporting Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for 
Data Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart A.
1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart A
a. Revisions to Subpart A To Streamline Implementation
    The EPA is finalizing several amendments intended to simplify and 
streamline the requirements of subpart A, with minor revisions. First, 
we are revising 40 CFR 98.2(i) to clarify the EPA's policies allowing 
reporters to cease reporting under Part 98. As proposed, we are 
retaining the current language in 40 CFR 98.2(i)(1) and (2) (i.e., 
``reported emissions'') to continue to refer to direct emitters and are 
adding new paragraph 40 CFR 98.2(i)(4) to clarify that the provisions 
of 40 CFR 98.2(i)(1) and (2) apply to suppliers (i.e., by specifying in 
40 CFR 98.2(i)(4) that 40 CFR 98.2(i)(1) and (2) apply to suppliers by 
substituting the term ``quantity of GHG supplied'' for ``emissions'' in 
40 CFR 98.2(i)(1) and (2)). Further, as proposed, we have clarified 
that, for suppliers, these off-ramp provisions apply individually to 
each importer, exporter, petroleum refinery, fractionator of natural 
gas liquids, local natural gas distribution company, and producer of 
carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide (N2O), or 
fluorinated greenhouse gases. The off-ramp requirements for suppliers 
in the final rule will be applied separately from those for direct 
emitters. This will occur whether the supplier and direct emitter 
report as two separate entities in e-GGRT or, for simplicity, as one 
entity in e-GGRT. See the preamble to the proposed rule (81 FR 2547) 
for additional information.
    The EPA is also finalizing revisions to 40 CFR 98.2(i)(3) to 
specify that reporting is not required for a subpart after all 
processes covered by that subpart cease to operate, provided the owner 
or operator submits a notification to the Administrator on the 
cessation of operation. The EPA is finalizing this revision with one 
minor change. We proposed that the notification must be submitted by 
March 31 of the year following the cessation of operation. As discussed 
in section III.A.2 of this preamble, we received comments requesting 
that a reporter be offered more flexibility in the notification 
deadline. Therefore, in the final rule, the EPA is adding one 
additional year to the notification deadline than was proposed. As 
such, a facility that ceased

[[Page 89198]]

to operate all hydrogen producing processes on July 1, 2015, for 
example, will be required to report subpart P data covering the first 
half of 2015 by March 31, 2016, as usual, but will be now allowed to 
remove subpart P from the 2016 reporting form it submits by March 31, 
2017, as long as it notified EPA of the operation cessation by March 
31, 2017, as well. This revision provides ample time for reporters to 
submit the notification and makes it possible for the EPA to rely on 
the existing design of e-GGRT to implement the notification of 
cessation (see section III.A.2 of this preamble for additional 
information). Note that 40 CFR 98.2(i)(3) does not apply to seasonal or 
other temporary cessation of operations, and that reporting must resume 
for any future calendar year during which any of the GHG-emitting 
processes or operations resume operation.
    We are finalizing a revision to 40 CFR 98.2(i)(3) to streamline 
reporting for operators of underground coal mines subject to 40 CFR 
part 98, subpart FF, with changes from proposal. Specifically, we are 
allowing owners and operators of underground mines the opportunity to 
cease reporting under the GHGRP if the underground mine(s) are 
abandoned and sealed. This revision is discussed in detail in section 
III.R of this preamble.
    The EPA is adding a new provision in 40 CFR 98.2(i)(5), as 
proposed, to clarify that if the operations of a facility or supplier 
are changed such that a process or operation no longer meets the 
``Definition of Source Category'' as specified in an applicable 
subpart, then the owner or operator is exempt from reporting under any 
such subpart for the reporting years following the year in which the 
change occurs, provided that the owner or operator submits a 
notification to the Administrator that announces the cessation of 
reporting for the process or operation. The EPA is finalizing this 
revision with one minor change. For consistency with the final 
revisions to 40 CFR 98.2(i)(3), we are revising 40 CFR 98.2(i)(5) to 
clarify that the notification is due no later than March 31 following 
the first reporting year in which the subpart processes or operations 
no longer meet the ``Definition of Source Category'' for an entire 
reporting year. This will be the due date for the first annual GHG 
report from the facility that omits a subpart from a prior year; 
therefore, EPA will need to be notified no later than this date to 
understand the reason for the missing subpart. For any future calendar 
year during which the process or operation meets the ``Definition of 
Source Category'' as specified in an applicable subpart, the owner or 
operator will be required to resume reporting for the process or 
operation. See section III.A.2 of this preamble for additional 
information on this change.
    Lastly, the EPA is finalizing a provision, on which comment was 
sought, to discontinue maintaining annual reporting forms once five 
years have passed. As a result of comments received, the EPA is 
memorializing that change in practice in subpart A at 40 CFR 98.3(h). 
The EPA initially outlined a plan to discontinue maintaining annual 
reporting forms that are more than five years old, thereby limiting a 
facility's ability to resubmit those prior year reports. The EPA chose 
five years in part to keep with the recordkeeping requirements for 
reporters who are required to use the EPA's Inputs Verification Tool 
(IVT). As discussed in section III.A.2 below, the EPA received comments 
requesting that facilities that are not required to use IVT and that 
are only required to maintain records for three years per 40 CFR 
98.3(g) should only be required to resubmit a report for three years. 
The EPA understands from those comments that some reporters would be 
unable to resubmit reports if they no longer have the facility records 
to review. Therefore, though we will maintain annual reporting forms 
for five years, we are revising 40 CFR 98.3(h) so that the annual 
report resubmission requirements only apply to the years for which a 
facility must retain records according to 40 CFR 98.3(g). As noted 
below, however, there could be circumstances where even though the 
facility was not required to maintain records or resubmit a report, the 
Agency would request any data still available to supplement previously 
reported data (e.g., EPA-issued section 114 letter to determine 
compliance or request data for regulatory development).
b. Revisions to Subpart A To Improve the Quality of Data Collected 
Under Part 98
    The EPA is finalizing several amendments to subpart A that will 
improve the quality of the data collected under the GHGRP, with only 
minor revisions from proposal. We are revising 40 CFR 98.3(c) as 
proposed to revise the content of the annual report to include the 
chemical name, CAS registry number, and the linear chemical formula for 
individually reported fluorinated GHGs and fluorinated heat transfer 
fluids (HTF).
    We are finalizing revisions to 40 CFR 98.3(c)(8) as proposed to 
clarify the missing data provisions. The EPA received one substantive 
comment on these proposed revisions, as discussed in section III.A.2 of 
this preamble, but has determined that the revisions can be finalized 
as proposed.
    We are finalizing revisions to 40 CFR 98.4(i) to update the content 
of the certificate of representation (COR) to include a list of all the 
40 CFR part 98 subparts under which the facility or supplier intends to 
report, with one minor change. We adding a clarification that the list 
of anticipated subparts does not need to be revised with revisions to 
the COR or if the actual applicable subparts change.
    Finally, we are adding 40 CFR 98.2(i)(6) as proposed to include a 
requirement that a facility must inform the EPA whenever the facility 
(or supplier) stops reporting under one e-GGRT identification number 
because the emissions (or quantity supplied) are being reported under 
another e-GGRT identification number. The date by which the reporter 
must notify the EPA of this change is the March 31 following the 
reporting year in which the change occurred, as proposed. On that date, 
the EPA will be expecting, but will not receive, a report from the 
subsumed facility. Therefore, the EPA will need to be notified of this 
change by that date to understand the reason for the missing report 
from the subsumed facility.
c. Other Amendments to Subpart A
    As proposed, we are finalizing revisions to 40 CFR 98.3(h)(4) to 
remove the requirement that the request for an extension of the 45-day 
period for submission of a revised report beyond the automatic 30 days 
must be submitted at least five days prior to the expiration of the 
automatic 30-day extension. These revisions simplify the process for 
requesting an extension for the reporter to respond to EPA questions on 
a submitted report or submit a revised report to correct a reporting 
error identified by the EPA during report verification.
    We are also amending the definitions of ``gas collection system'' 
and ``ventilation hole or shaft'' in 40 CFR 98.6 as proposed in section 
III.A.3 of the preamble to the proposed rule (81 FR 2550). These 
amendments serve to clarify the definitions of these terms for 
reporters. The EPA received no comments objecting to the proposed 
revisions.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses on Subpart A
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to the proposed amendments to subpart A. See the document 
``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Rule: 2015

[[Page 89199]]

Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for Data Elements under 
the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-
0526 for a complete listing of all comments and responses related to 
subpart A.
    Comment: One commenter questioned the EPA's proposed revisions to 
40 CFR 98.2(i) to clarify when reporters may cease reporting. The 
commenter expressed concern that if a reporter does not notify EPA by 
the March 31st deadline following the cessation of applicable processes 
or operations, that they would then be required to report zero 
emissions indefinitely. The commenter provided an example of a 
circumstance where a process or operation is ceased temporarily, but 
after the March 31st notification deadline it is determined that the 
cessation is permanent. The commenter requested clarification that the 
reporter would still be able to notify the EPA of the change before 
March 31st of the next year and not be subject to reporting for the 
reporting year following notification.
    Response: It was not the EPA's intent to establish a one-time only 
notification deadline after which a facility will not be allowed to 
cease reporting for a closed process. The reason for proposing a 
notification deadline was to minimize unnecessary follow-up 
verification activities. If a reporter has failed to inform the EPA of 
a process closure and the report is missing data for a previously 
reported process or contains significant emissions differences from the 
prior year's report, then error flags are generated for the report in 
e-GGRT. This results in unnecessary time spent by both the EPA and the 
facility to resolve the error flags. Therefore, once a facility reports 
under a particular subpart, reporting must continue each year until 
after all processes under that subpart either are permanently closed 
(40 CFR 98.2(i)(3)) or no longer meet the definition of source category 
as specified in the applicable subpart (40 CFR 98.2(i)(5)).
    It was always the EPA's intention to implement this revision in a 
streamlined, sensible way that uses the existing features of e-GGRT as 
much as possible, with minimal or no changes from year to year. As 
such, the EPA is editing the proposed text for 40 CFR 98.2(i)(3) and 
(5) so that under this final action the notification will be due no 
later than March 31 following the first reporting year in which the 
subpart processes or operations have ceased (or no longer meet the 
definition of the applicable subpart) for an entire reporting year. 
Thus, a facility that permanently ceases operations of a process in 
July of 2016 will report the part-year 2016 emissions of that process 
as usual by March 31, 2017, and will notify the EPA of the cessation of 
that process no later than March 31, 2018. The EPA recognizes that the 
reporting of 2016 data for this closed process that occurs on March 31, 
2017, will not look or feel any different than in prior years, so a 
facility may unintentionally neglect to take the extra notification 
step. This edit to the proposed language provides such facilities and 
suppliers with some additional flexibility in the notification 
deadline. This edit also makes it possible for the EPA to rely on the 
existing design of e-GGRT as the cessation notification mechanism by 
allowing the reporter to clear the subpart check box on the Facility 
Overview screen in e-GGRT when completing the reporting forms for the 
first full year after which the subpart processes or operations ceased. 
Reporters will not be required to enter further process data or 
emissions information once the subpart check box is cleared.
    Reporters who desire to notify the EPA in advance of the deadline 
in the final rule will be able to submit a notification to the EPA 
informing them of the process closure using the Help Desk or another 
equally streamlined and simple procedure in e-GGRT. In the example 
above, a facility that permanently ceases operations of a process in 
July of 2016 will report the part-year 2016 emissions of that process 
by March 31, 2017 and could, at that time, submit a notification to the 
EPA to indicate the permanent closure of the process prior to the next 
reporting year. The EPA has retained this option to provide flexibility 
for reporters who wish to notify earlier. The EPA may consider minor 
changes to e-GGRT in the future to provide reporters with an 
alternative means to provide this notification.
    Regarding the commenter's concerns related to temporary closures at 
the time of the reporting deadline, the ability to cease reporting for 
a subpart after a permanent closure and the process for doing so are 
not affected by any temporary closure that precedes the permanent 
closure. In the context of the GHGRP, the process or operation is 
permanently closed whenever the owner or operator determines that the 
process or operation will never resume again. For example, consider a 
facility for which all subpart S processes and operations cease to 
operate in July. At the time of cessation (in July) the owner or 
operator assumes the cessation will be temporary. However, one month 
later (in August) the owner determines that the cessation is in fact 
permanent and the operations will never resume. In this example, the 
permanent cessation of operation occurred in August. If the 
determination later proves to be incorrect, and the process or 
operation resumes, then the owner or operator must resume reporting for 
the relevant process or operation, as specified in 40 CFR 98.2(h)(3).
    Emissions must be reported for the process or operation for any 
periods of temporary closure. This includes reporting subpart emissions 
of zero metric tons if, on the date that reporting occurs, the reporter 
determines that the cessation during the entire prior reporting year 
was only temporary and expects operations to resume at some time in the 
future. It is logical in this case for the facility to submit zero 
subpart emissions rather than remove the subpart entirely because it is 
in the facility's best interest to retain the subpart reporting form so 
that e-GGRT can pre-populate certain data fields in future reporting 
years and the facility does not have to re-enter as much data.
    In reviewing this comment, the EPA has made additional minor 
technical changes reflected in subpart A. The phrase ``this paragraph 
(i)(3) does not apply to facilities with municipal solid waste 
landfills or industrial waste landfills. . . .'' has been revised to 
``this paragraph (i)(3) does not apply to the municipal solid waste 
landfill source category (subpart HH) or the industrial waste landfill 
source category (subpart TT).'' This change clarifies that a municipal 
solid waste landfill or industrial waste landfill can cease reporting 
for a subpart other than subpart HH or TT following its cessation of 
operation.
    Comment: The EPA received several comments on our proposal to 
discontinue maintaining annual reporting forms older than the prior 
five years, thereby limiting a facility's ability to resubmit those 
prior year reports. Four commenters agreed that limiting the 
resubmittal of prior year reports to five years was appropriate and 
reasonable. One of those commenters requested that the five-year period 
be included as an amendment to Part 98. The commenter asserted that the 
EPA cannot currently prohibit a reporter from resubmitting a report to 
comply with the existing rule if an error is discovered (see 40 CFR 
98.3(h)(1)). The commenter noted that without an amendment to the rule, 
the EPA would still be obligated to maintain the forms necessary for 
reporters to comply with the resubmission requirement should it be 
triggered. The commenter also urged

[[Page 89200]]

that an amendment to the rule is necessary to clarify whether a 
reporter could be required to respond to an EPA notification of 
potential error after the five-year period has passed.
    Other commenters insisted that the five-year period was 
unreasonable for some reporters. The commenters noted that the five-
year recordkeeping requirement only applies to facilities using the IVT 
when reporting. The commenters stated that some reporters are only 
subject to a three-year recordkeeping requirement, as noted in a 
footnote to the preamble of the proposed rule (81 FR 2548). The 
commenters recommended that EPA establish the resubmittal period based 
on the recordkeeping requirements applicable to a particular reporter 
(either three years or five years), to ensure that the report 
resubmission requirements are consistent with the recordkeeping 
provisions promulgated in 40 CFR 98.3(g).
    Response: After consideration of the comments received, the EPA is 
finalizing, with some changes, our proposal to discontinue maintaining 
annual reporting forms that are more than five years old, thereby 
limiting a facility's ability to resubmit those prior year reports. The 
EPA is making corresponding revisions to 40 CFR 98.3(h).
    The EPA agrees that a limitation on the resubmittal of prior year 
reports should be implemented as an amendment to Part 98. Section 
98.3(h)(1) and (2) specifies that reporters are required to resubmit an 
annual report if either they or the EPA identify one or more 
substantive errors in the report. A reporter cannot resubmit a report 
to comply with those requirements, however, if the reporting form is no 
longer available. We also agree with the comment that a facility may be 
unable to resubmit a report once its mandatory recordkeeping period has 
passed. The EPA proposed to discontinue the maintenance of reporting 
forms after five years, thereby limiting the resubmission requirements 
for all facilities to five years. The EPA initially selected a five-
year time period in part because of the recordkeeping requirements for 
facilities required to use the EPA's verification software (i.e., the 
IVT). Per 40 CFR 98.3(g), facilities who are required to use the IVT 
are required to maintain all records at the facility for five years, 
including records for those subparts for which the IVT is not required. 
The EPA previously finalized the 5-year record retention time for 
facilities using the IVT in the ``Revisions to Reporting and 
Recordkeeping Requirements, and Confidentiality Determinations Under 
the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program'' (79 FR 63750, October 24, 2014). 
However, per 40 CFR 98.3(g), facilities that are not required to use 
the IVT for any subparts under which they are reporting are only 
required to maintain records for three years.
    After considering these comments, the EPA is amending 40 CFR 
98.3(h) to specify that the paragraphs in that section only apply to 
the recordkeeping requirement time period specified in 40 CFR 98.3(g). 
The EPA does not intend to request a report resubmission for a 
reporting year beyond that time period; however, there may be 
circumstances where the Agency may request additional data to 
supplement previously reported data (e.g., EPA-issued section 114 
letter to determine compliance or request data for regulatory 
development).
    Although reporters will not be required by regulation to resubmit 
reports for any year beyond which they must maintain records, the 
revisions to 40 CFR 98.3(h) will not prevent facilities from 
voluntarily resubmitting reports for up to five years. The EPA 
recognizes that, in addition to resubmitting reports when required, 
reporters sometimes voluntarily resubmit annual reports to better 
reflect facility emissions. The EPA's primary reason for discontinuing 
the maintenance of annual reporting forms after five years is to 
minimize the burden on the EPA. Although some subparts do not use the 
verification software (e.g., subpart HH--Municipal Solid Waste 
Landfills) and do not trigger the 5-year recordkeeping provision on 
their own, the EPA will continue to maintain and make available 
reporting forms for all subparts for the prior five years. Therefore, 
we are not limiting voluntary resubmittal of reports based on the 
three-year recordkeeping retention requirements. As such, reporters who 
have maintained records for five years will still be able to acquire 
the prior year reporting forms for any applicable subpart for up to 
five years and resubmit the reporting forms during this time frame.
    The EPA has determined that by making these additional revisions, 
the Agency will continue to streamline the requirements of Part 98 by 
reducing the burden on regulated entities to resubmit reports, as well 
as reducing the burden on the EPA to maintain forms beyond five 
reporting years, while allowing for correction of the data set where 
data records exist to support it. Further, the EPA has determined that 
these additional changes will have minimal impact on the quality of the 
data provided to the Agency. As noted in the preamble to the proposed 
rule (81 FR 2548), to date, resubmissions for past years have not 
impacted overall sector or total emission trends. Therefore, the EPA 
does not anticipate that applying the requirements to resubmit reports 
to only the recordkeeping period (three years for facilities not 
required to use the IVT or five years for facilities required to use 
the IVT) will significantly impact the quality of the data collected.
    Comment: The EPA received several comments on the proposal to 
clarify the missing data provisions in 40 CFR 98.3(c)(8). Commenters 
asserted that the proposed revisions would expand the data reporting 
requirements and increase the burden on reporters and the EPA. The 
commenters stated that there is no reason to revise the current rule 
requirements (i.e., the combination of the existing subpart A 
requirements and, where necessary, additional subpart-specific 
recordkeeping provisions). The commenters believed that the proposed 
revisions to 40 CFR 98.3(c)(8) would have significant impacts on the e-
GGRT and the IVT systems, requiring additional time to set up the entry 
fields in the systems and to apply confidentiality determinations to 
the types of data elements that they believed would be required to be 
collected under the proposed change.
    Response: The EPA is finalizing this revision as proposed. The EPA 
disagrees with the commenters that the revisions to 40 CFR 98.3(c)(8) 
will significantly expand the data reporting requirements. The 
commenters have misconstrued the nature of the revision. Each 
individual subpart of Part 98 has always specified both the subpart-
specific parameters for which substitute data value calculations are 
allowed and the allowable substitute data value calculations. 40 CFR 
98.3(c)(8) was included in Part 98 merely to authorize the EPA to 
collect information on the frequency of use of the substitute data 
value calculations that are specified in the individual subparts. This 
final revision to subpart A does not change the subpart-specific 
parameters for which substitute data value calculations are already 
specified and does not enhance the EPA's ability to collect information 
on substitute data value calculations beyond those calculations 
contained in each individual subpart. Rather the revision harmonizes 
the language of 40 CFR 98.3(c)(8) with the language used in individual 
subparts in order to fully realize the original intended purpose of 40 
CFR 98.3(c)(8).
    The revision clarifies the type of data that is already required to 
be collected

[[Page 89201]]

by substituting the term ``parameter'' for ``data element,'' consistent 
with the terminology in the ``Procedures for estimating missing data'' 
sections in most subparts. This clarification recognizes that the 
missing data provisions provided in each subpart apply to measured 
parameters that are monitored or used in calculating emissions. Due to 
rule changes adopted since the GHGRP was initially published, some data 
that are used to calculate emissions are not reported. Specifically, 
Part 98 allows for an alternative verification method where some 
parameters that are inputs to calculation methodologies are not 
reported but instead are used by the EPA's IVT to verify the reported 
emissions. Accordingly, it was unclear whether the term ``data 
element'' in the version of 40 CFR 98.3(c)(8) pre-dating this 
clarification referred only to those data elements that are required to 
be reported in the ``Data reporting requirements'' section of each 
subpart. However, even if a specific parameter is not collected by the 
EPA, it was always the EPA's intention to require reporters to account 
for use of missing data procedures if missing data procedures are 
specified in the applicable subpart.
    The EPA identified at least one instance of this conflict in 40 CFR 
part 98 that precipitated the proposal of this clarification. In the 
``Procedures for estimating missing data'' section of subpart O (HCFC-
22 Production and HFC-23 Destruction) (40 CFR 98.155), the regulation 
specifies missing data calculations for chemical concentration in a 
product and for product mass. The reporter is required to use these two 
parameters to calculate chemical mass. However, as specified in the 
subpart O ``Data reporting requirements'' section (40 CFR 98.156), only 
the chemical mass is collected by the EPA--not the chemical 
concentration in the product or the product mass. Under subpart A, it 
was unclear whether missing data information would need to include 
information on the frequency of use of missing data procedures for 
chemical concentration and product mass, or only for chemical mass. 
Information on the frequency of use of missing data procedures for 
chemical mass by itself did not explain whether the flow rate or 
concentration data were missing (or both). This was a problem because 
it impeded the EPA's understanding of data quality if the flow rate was 
relatively constant but the concentration was not. In addition, this 
aggregate reporting of missing data led to bizarre results, where the 
number of hours of missing data for chemical mass exceeded the total 
number of hours in a year because missing data methods were used for 
both of the parameters that fed into that data element. With the 
revision to 40 CFR 98.3(c)(8) being finalized in this action, the EPA 
is clarifying that subpart A requires reporting of use of missing data 
procedures for all the parameters for which the applicable subpart 
specifies missing data procedures. For subpart O, this means that 
subpart A requires reporting of information on the use of missing data 
procedures for each of the input parameters. The EPA will update e-GGRT 
to collect this information for subpart O.
    The EPA has not to date identified any other instances of this 
conflict in 40 CFR part 98, but we recognize that some additional cases 
may become apparent in the future. If and when they do, the EPA will 
update e-GGRT to collect information on the use of missing data 
procedures for those parameters. The EPA fully expects the update to e-
GGRT in subpart O and any other necessary e-GGRT update in the future 
to present a very minimal increase in burden on reporters. For those 
subparts that are affected, a simple and flexible system for entering 
this information can be implemented. If the applicable subpart does not 
specify use of missing data procedures for a parameter, then reporters 
will not need to report use of missing data procedures for that 
parameter unless and until the EPA changes the applicable subpart to 
require use of such procedures. Where the applicable subpart does 
specify use of missing data procedures for a parameter but the 
parameter is not included in e-GGRT, reporters will need to submit 
information on use of missing data procedures for that parameter only 
when e-GGRT is updated to collect such information for the relevant 
subpart.
    Section 98.3(c)(8) requires only identification of the parameters 
for which missing data procedures were used and the duration for which 
the missing data procedures were used for each parameter. The revision 
does not require that the reporter provide the value of the parameter, 
but only identify the parameter. For example, a reporter might indicate 
that the missing data procedures were used for ``monthly production 
data'' for two months of the reporting year, but would not report the 
monthly production data values used.
3. When the Final Revisions to Subpart A Become Effective
    As shown in Tables 3 and 4 of this preamble, final revisions to 
subpart A become effective on either January 1, 2017 or January 1, 2018 
and will be reflected starting either with RY2016 reports submitted in 
2017 or with RY2017 reports submitted in 2018.
    We are finalizing that the amendments to 40 CFR 98.2(i)(3) and (5) 
and 40 CFR 98.3(h) are effective on January 1, 2017, and will apply 
starting with RY2016 reports. These amendments serve to reduce burden 
on reporters and can be implemented with minimal lead time, therefore 
they will be reflected starting with the RY2016 reports submitted in 
2017. At proposal these amendments were to be effective with all other 
amendments to 40 CFR 98.2 and apply to RY2017 reports. However, for 40 
CFR 98.2(i)(3), because this amendment serves to allow coal mines that 
have ceased operations and are abandoned and sealed to stop reporting 
to the program, thereby serving to reduce burden on these coal mines 
for the reasons discussed in section III.R below, and is can be 
implemented with minimal lead time, this revision will be reflected 
starting with the RY2016 reports. Similarly, the amendment to 40 CFR 
98.2(i)(5) allows facilities that have an operation that no longer 
meets the ``Definition of Source Category,'' as specified in an 
applicable subpart, to discontinue complying with that subpart for the 
reporting year following the year in which the change occurs, as 
described in section III.A.1.a of this preamble. This revision also 
serves to reduce burden on facilities that meet this new provision and 
is feasible to make effective as soon as possible, therefore, this 
revision will be reflected starting with the RY2016 reports.
    We are also finalizing that the amendment to 40 CFR 98.3(h) is 
effective on January 1, 2017, and will apply starting with the RY2016 
reports. As described in section III.A.1.a of this preamble, the 
amendment to 40 CFR 98.3(h) will apply the report resubmission 
requirements to the reporting years for which a facility is required to 
retain records. At proposal, we requested comment on discontinuing the 
maintenance of annual reporting forms for the prior five years but did 
not propose a change to subpart A. Upon consideration of comments 
received, as described in section III.A.2 of this preamble, we are 
finalizing an amendment to the rule that applies the existing report 
resubmission requirements to a facility's recordkeeping requirements 
period. Because this amendment reduces burden on reporters by limiting 
the reporting years to which the resubmission requirements apply and 
reduces burden on the Agency by capping the electronic reporting forms 
that must be maintained, and because it

[[Page 89202]]

can be implemented with minimal lead time, this revision will be 
effective on January 1, 2017 and reflected in RY2016 reports.
    We are finalizing that the amendment to 40 CFR 98.7(l)(1) is 
effective January 1, 2017 and will apply starting with the RY2017 
report submitted in 2018. This amendment updates the reference to the 
MSHA Handbook to the most recent 2016 edition. More explanation of this 
revision and its timing can be found in section III.R.3 of this 
preamble.
    The remaining amendments to subpart A are shown in Table 4 of this 
preamble and are consistent with the description in section I.E.2 of 
this preamble. All remaining amendments are effective January 1, 2018 
and will be reflected in RY2017 reports submitted in 2018, with the 
exception of the revision to Table A-5. The revisions to Table A-5 are 
effective on January 1, 2018 and will be reflected in RY2018 reports 
submitted in 2019. These revisions are related to applicability of 
facilities in subpart OO. See section III.W.3 for more detail on the 
revisions to Table A-5.

B. Subpart C--General Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources

    We are finalizing several amendments to subpart C of Part 98 
(General Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources). This section discusses 
the substantive changes to subpart C; additional minor corrections and 
clarifications are summarized in the Final Table of Revisions available 
in the docket for this rulemaking (Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-
0526). We are also finalizing confidentiality determinations for new 
data elements resulting from these revisions to subpart C as proposed; 
see section IV of this preamble and the memorandum ``Final Data 
Category Assignments and Confidentiality Determinations for Data 
Elements in the Proposed 2015 Revisions'' in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2015-0526 for additional information on the final category assignments 
and confidentiality determinations for these data elements.
    The EPA received several comments on subpart C. Substantive 
comments are addressed in section III.B.2 of this preamble; see the 
document ``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas 
Reporting Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for 
Data Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart C.
1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart C
a. Revisions to Subpart C To Improve Quality of Data Collected in Part 
98
    We are finalizing revisions that improve the EPA's ability to 
verify data under Part 98, while generally resulting in only a slight 
increase in burden for reporters. First, as proposed, the EPA is 
requiring reporting of the moisture content used to correct the default 
HHV for wood and wood residuals (dry basis) in Table C-1 to subpart C, 
in accordance with the procedures of footnote 5 in Table C-1. The EPA 
is finalizing as proposed the addition of the moisture correction 
calculation as a reporting element, as well as a data element that will 
be entered into IVT. As proposed, we are allowing reporters to elect 
under 40 CFR 98.3(d)(3)(v) and 40 CFR 98.36(a) (for subpart C sources 
that do not meet the criteria specified in 40 CFR 98.36(f)) to either 
enter the moisture content into IVT or, if potential disclosure is not 
a concern to the reporter, report the data.\4\ If a reporter elects to 
enter the data into IVT, the reporter will also be required to keep a 
record of the data as specified in 40 CFR 98.37(b)(37). The EPA is 
finalizing that, for sources that meet the criteria in 40 CFR 98.36(f), 
there are no disclosure concerns and the moisture content of the wood 
and wood residuals must be reported in e-GGRT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ If a reporter elects to report the moisture content of wood 
and wood residuals for a source that does not meet the criteria 
specified in 40 CFR 98.36(f), e-GGRT will require the reporter to 
waive the right to make confidentiality claims before reporting the 
moisture content via e-GGRT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For emissions reported using the aggregation of units (GP) and 
common pipe (CP) configurations, the EPA is finalizing as proposed a 
requirement to report the cumulative maximum rated heat input capacity 
for all units (within the configuration) that have a maximum rated heat 
input capacity greater than or equal to 10 (mmBtu/hr). The EPA received 
several significant comments regarding this requirement as discussed in 
section III.B.2 of this preamble.
    When reporting the cumulative maximum rated heat input capacity, 
reporters will not be required to account for units less than 10 mmBtu/
hr. For GP configurations, this means that the cumulative maximum rated 
heat input capacity will be determined as the sum of the maximum rated 
heat input capacities for all units in the group that are greater than 
or equal to 10 mmBtu/hr and less than or equal to 250 mmBtu/hr. Units 
with a maximum rated heat input capacity greater than 250 mmBtu/hr are 
not allowed to use the GP configuration. For CP configurations, the 
cumulative maximum rated heat input capacity will be determined as the 
sum of the maximum rated heat input capacities for all units served by 
the pipe that are greater than or equal to 10 (mmBtu/hr). Note that 
fuel use and corresponding emissions are still required to be reported 
for units with a maximum rated heat input capacity less than 10 (mmBtu/
hr). Emissions reporting of GHGs for GP and CP configurations will 
remain unchanged.
b. Other Amendments to Subpart C
    We are finalizing other revisions to the requirements of 40 CFR 
part 98, subpart C to: (1) Clarify the reporting requirements when the 
results of HHV sampling are received less frequently than monthly for 
certain sources; (2) streamline the conversion factors used to convert 
short tons to metric tons; and (3) revise Tables C-1 and C-2 to more 
clearly define emission factors for certain petroleum products.
    First, as proposed, we are amending 40 CFR 98.33(a)(2)(ii)(A) to 
clarify the definition of terms for Equation C-2b in cases where the 
results of HHV sampling are received less frequently than monthly. This 
finalized revision replaces the term ``month'' in the equation inputs 
``(HHV)I,'' ``(Fuel)I,'' and ``n'' with the term 
``samples.''
    We are finalizing changes to Tables C-1 and C-2 to remove 
duplication and to further classify several fuels to provide clarity. 
We are removing duplication of default HHV and CO2 emission 
factors for petroleum coke in Table C-1 and including the fuel under a 
new category entitled ``Petroleum products--solid.''
    Next, we are finalizing changes to Table C-1 to move the fuel 
propane gas from the ``Other fuels--gaseous'' category into a new 
category entitled ``Petroleum products--gaseous.'' As proposed, we are 
also retaining propane under the ``Petroleum products'' category, which 
we are renaming to ``Petroleum products--liquid'' to clarify that all 
fuels in this category are liquid fuels. In conjunction with the 
changes to Table C-1, we are also finalizing, as proposed, a change to 
Table C-2 to revise the ``Petroleum (All fuel types in Table C-1)'' 
category to ``Petroleum Products (All fuel types in Table C-1),'' which 
will encompass all liquid, solid, and gaseous petroleum products and 
clarify that the methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide 
(N2O) emissions for these fuels should be calculated and 
reported accordingly. We are also finalizing a change to Table C-2 to 
streamline the CH4 and N2O emission factors for 
fuels in the ``Other fuels--solid'' category. As

[[Page 89203]]

proposed, we are combining the MSW and tire line items into an ``Other 
fuels--solid'' category, which will encompass all three solid fuels 
(i.e., MSW, tires and plastics).
    Finally, we are updating the Standard Test Methods for Determining 
the Biobased Content of Solid, Liquid, and Gaseous Samples using 
Radiocarbon Analysis (ASTM D6866-08) to the most current standard. We 
initially proposed to update ASTM D6866-08 to the current standard at 
the time of proposal, Standard Test Methods for Determining the 
Biobased Content of Solid, Liquid, and Gaseous Samples using 
Radiocarbon Analysis (ASTM D6866-12). As discussed in section III.B.2 
of this preamble, we received several comments expressing the concern 
that the proposed version of the standards (ASTM D6866-12) was in the 
process of being revised, and an updated version of these standards 
(ASTM D6866-16) was published on June 1, 2016. We are updating the 
final rule to revise references to the method in 40 CFR 98.34(d) and 
(e), 40 CFR 98.36(e)(2), and 40 CFR 98.7(e)(33) to refer to the current 
June 2016 standards.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses on Subpart C
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to the proposed amendments to subpart C. See the document 
``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for Data 
Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. No 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart C.
    Comment: Several significant comments were received regarding the 
new requirement to report cumulative maximum rated heat input capacity 
for GP and CP configurations. Commenters stated that the intended use 
of this new data element was unclear. Commenters also stated that the 
new data element would not provide any meaningful data to the program. 
Multiple commenters stated that the cumulative maximum rated heat input 
capacity could be determined from existing data. Commenters questioned 
the EPA's decision to exclude units that are less than 10 mmBtu/hr, 
with one commenter suggesting that the EPA should consider lowering the 
threshold to 2.5 mmBtu/hr. Commenters also disagreed with the EPA's 
proposed assessment that the burden associated with collecting this 
data element would be minimal.
    Response: The EPA appreciates the comments received regarding this 
new data reporting requirement for GP and CP configurations, but 
disagrees with many of the commenters' positions. The EPA intends to 
use the cumulative maximum rated heat input capacity to verify that 
emissions reported under the GP and CP configurations are not over 
reported. This is in the interest of the GHGRP and to reporters as 
well, because this information will assist in ensuring that reported 
emissions have not been over stated. Five years of report verification 
have demonstrated that over-reporting in GP and CP configurations does 
occur and that it is often difficult to detect for the approximately 
7,000 configurations under subpart C. The EPA currently is able to 
identify when gross over-reporting has occurred only at one of these 
configurations (e.g., a single GP configuration reports more than 
several hundred billion metric tons of CO2). Because the EPA 
has no information regarding the cumulative maximum rated heat input 
capacity or the total number of units in a GP or CP configuration, it 
is very difficult to identify when over-reporting has occurred. With 
this new information, the EPA will be able to identify significant 
over-reporting in these configurations, as described below.
    The cumulative maximum rated heat input capacity can be used to 
approximate the maximum potential to emit for all units in the group. 
The EPA will then apply a multiplier to the potential emissions to 
account for margin of error. Because many units often operate under 
design capacity, exceeding the design capacity potential to emit times 
a margin of error multiplier is a clear indication that emissions have 
been overstated or that the cumulative maximum rated heat input 
capacity has been understated.
    Regarding the commenter's statement that this data element can be 
approximated with existing reported data, the EPA notes that back 
calculating the average maximum rated heat input capacity is not 
practical for two reasons. First, if emissions are over reported for a 
GP or CP configuration, back calculating from a possible over reported 
value simply propagates the potential error. Because the main reason 
for collecting these new data elements is to verify that emissions from 
these configurations are not over reported, back calculating will not 
provide any meaningful verification. Secondly, reporters commonly use 
the Tier 3 calculation methodologies. In many instances, the equation 
inputs for these calculations are claimed as confidential and in this 
case, back calculating is infeasible.
    Regarding the EPA's exemption for units that are less than 10 
mmBtu/hr maximum rated heat input capacity, as per the data from 
reporting year 2014, the EPA concluded that the emissions contribution 
of units less than 10 mmBtu/hr is small compared to the total emissions 
in aggregations with units greater than 10 mmBtu/hr. The EPA believes 
that meaningful data verification can be achieved by only collecting 
cumulative maximum rated heat input capacity for units greater than 10 
mmBtu/hr. This is due to the fact the bulk of emissions reported under 
these configurations appears to originate from emissions units that are 
greater than 10 mmBtu/hr maximum rated heat input capacity.
    If the highest maximum rated heat input capacity of all units in a 
configuration is below 10 mmBtu/hr, the EPA has determined that 
reporting the cumulative maximum rated heat input capacity is not 
necessary. Configurations under this threshold are still required to 
report the highest maximum rated heat input capacity of any unit in the 
group and the emissions associated with the GP or CP configuration, per 
existing requirements under 40 CFR 98.3(c)(1) and (3), but will not be 
required to report the cumulative maximum rated heat input capacity for 
all units in the configuration. As described in the preamble to the 
proposed rule, the EPA maintains that the 10 mmBtu/hr threshold value 
will provide meaningful data for the purposes of verification while 
simultaneously easing the burden of tracking small sources.
    As noted, units less than 10 mmBtu/hr typically contribute minor 
emissions to the overall subpart C emissions profile. As discussed in 
the preamble to the proposal, there were approximately 7,000 GP and CP 
configurations reported in 2014, out of the total 18,000 configurations 
reported in subpart C. Of the 7,000, approximately 2,250 reported that 
the highest maximum rated heat input capacity of any unit in the 
configuration was less than 10 mmBtu/hr. The total non-biogenic 
CO2 reported from these 2,250 configurations was 
approximately 2 percent of the total non-biogenic CO2 
reported for all 7,000 GP and CP configurations. The remaining 98 
percent of non-biogenic CO2 reported came from the 4,750 GP 
and CP configurations that identified the highest maximum rated heat 
input capacity of any unit as greater than or equal to 10 mmBtu/hr. 
These data provide evidence that using the heat input capacity 
information from units

[[Page 89204]]

greater than or equal to 10 mmBtu/hr will allow for meaningful data 
validation without mandating overly burdensome requirements for 
reporters.
    Regarding the comment that the EPA should consider lowering the 
threshold to 2.5 mmBtu/hr, the EPA believes that lowering the proposed 
threshold to 2.5 mmBtu/hr, as opposed to 10 mmBtu/hr, would increase 
burden without significantly increasing the EPA's ability to verify 
emissions data, as the difference would represent less than 2 percent 
of the non-biogenic CO2 emissions. The EPA acknowledges that 
the burden under subpart C will increase as a result of the requirement 
to report these new data elements. The EPA also acknowledges that the 
burden estimate provided in the preamble to the proposal was 
understated for subpart C. The burden estimate provided at the time of 
proposal did not account for the fact that in order to report these two 
new data elements, reporters would need to collect and sum the 
cumulative maximum rated heat input capacity for multiple units in each 
aggregated CP or GP configuration. The EPA has revised the burden 
estimate to reflect this need. Based on our revised burden estimate 
(see the memorandum, ``Assessment of Burden Impacts of Final 2015 
Revisions to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' available in Docket 
Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526), the EPA still finds that the overall 
burden increase for subpart C is justified given the magnitude and 
uncertainty of emissions represented in GP and CP configurations under 
subpart C.
    When the EPA reviewed the existing subpart C data set as described 
in the preamble to the proposed rule (81 FR 2551), we determined that 
over 50 percent of the non-biogenic CO2 reported under 
subpart C is reported using GP or CP configurations. Because this 
represents a significant portion of the subpart C emissions profile, 
the EPA has determined that further information is needed to ensure 
that these data are not being over reported.
    The EPA also notes that the maximum rated heat input capacity for 
all units contained in a GP configuration should have been determined 
at some point in prior year reporting. The GP configuration is allowed 
only for units that are less than 250 mmBtu/hr. As such, facilities 
utilizing this configuration should have already determined the maximum 
rated heat input capacity of the units in these aggregations in order 
to confirm that they are less than 250 mmBtu/hr. As for the CP 
configurations, the EPA maintains that existing air permits and 
compliance records for other federal and state regulations likely 
contain the heat input capacity data required to be reported.
    Finally, the EPA acknowledges that existing state and federal 
requirements likely already require facilities to report this data 
element. Commenters have stated that the EPA should use this data 
element to perform verification in lieu of requiring facilities to 
report it under the GHGRP. Although operating permits and other 
compliance records likely contain this information, these documents are 
not readily available to the EPA. Even if this information were readily 
available to the Agency, the EPA has no means by which to determine 
what permitted units are included in a GP or CP configuration. The EPA 
maintains that facilities have the best information available and are 
the only entities capable of determining the cumulative maximum rated 
heat input capacity of their chosen GP and CP configurations.
    Comment: The EPA received several comments indicating that the 
proposed update of the Standard Test Methods for Determining the 
Biobased Content of Solid, Liquid, and Gaseous Samples using 
Radiocarbon Analysis from ASTM D6866-08 to ASTM D6866-12 should not be 
finalized as the proposed standards were in the process of being 
updated by ASTM, and that the proposed version would soon be out of 
date. Commenters requested that the updated version of the standards 
would be more appropriate to incorporate in the rule, as they would 
include a more accurate variable that could affect the calculation of 
the biogenic CO2 fraction.
    Response: The EPA agrees with commenters that incorporating the 
most recent version of the test methods is appropriate to ensure that 
accurate biogenic CO2 fractions are reported. Following the 
public comment period, an updated version of ASTM D6866 was published 
on June 1, 2016 (ASTM D6866-16). The EPA reviewed the updated standards 
and determined that these test methods remain appropriate and can 
continue to be used under the GHGRP, and would result in improved data 
quality. Therefore, we are updating the final rule to revise references 
to these methods to refer to the revised June 2016 standards.
3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart C Become Effective
    As shown in Table 4 of this preamble and consistent with the 
description of amendments in section I.E.2 of this preamble, all 
amendments to subpart C will be effective on January 1, 2018 as 
proposed and will be reflected starting with RY2017 reports that are 
submitted in 2018. No comments were received on the timing of revisions 
to subpart C.

C. Subpart E--Adipic Acid Production

    In this action, we are finalizing amendments to subpart E of Part 
98 (Adipic Acid Production), as proposed. This section discusses the 
amendments to subpart E. We are also finalizing as proposed 
confidentiality determinations for new data elements resulting from the 
revisions to subpart E; see the memorandum ``Final Data Category 
Assignments and Confidentiality Determinations for Data Elements in the 
Proposed 2015 Revisions'' in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for 
additional information on the final category assignments and 
confidentiality determinations for this data element. The EPA received 
no comments objecting to the proposed revisions to subpart E.
1. Revisions to Subpart E To Streamline Implementation
    We are finalizing one amendment that is intended to simplify and 
streamline the requirements of subpart E and increase the efficiency of 
the report submittal process. Subpart E provides the option of 
requesting the Administrator to approve an alternative method for 
determining N2O emissions from adipic acid production. 
Previously, reporters were required to request such approval annually 
in all circumstances. As proposed, the EPA is revising 40 CFR 
98.53(a)(2) to state conditions under which annual approval will not be 
required. The reporter must continue to request approval annually where 
there have been changes in the reporter's requested methodology. If a 
reporter receives approval to use an alternative method in the previous 
reporting year and the methodology has not changed, the EPA is allowing 
use of the alternative method to be automatically approved for 
subsequent reporting years. Reporters will only need to notify the EPA 
that they are using a previously approved alternative method and will 
not require further approval from the Agency. This notification will be 
included in the annual report submission. If, however, a reporter makes 
any changes to the previously-approved alternative method, then the 
reporter must request permission to use the revised method as stated in 
40 CFR 98.53(a)(2). These revisions are being finalized as proposed.
2. Revisions to Subpart E To Improve the Quality of Data Collected 
Under Part 98 and Improve the U.S. GHG Inventory
    We are finalizing one amendment that is intended to improve the 
quality of

[[Page 89205]]

data collected under subpart E while generally resulting in only a 
slight increase in burden for reporters. As proposed, we are revising 
40 CFR 98.56(f) to require reporting of the date of installation of any 
N2O abatement technology (if applicable). This data element 
may be carried over from one reporting year to the next. The reporter 
will not be required to make changes unless additional abatement 
technology is installed at a later date.
3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart E Become Effective
    As shown in Table 4 of this preamble and consistent with the 
description of amendments in section I.E.2 of this preamble, all 
amendments to subpart E will be effective on January 1, 2018 as 
proposed and will be reflected starting with RY2017 reports that are 
submitted in 2018. No comments were received on the timing of revisions 
to subpart E.

D. Subpart F--Aluminum Production

    In this action, we are finalizing several amendments to 40 CFR part 
98, subpart F (Aluminum Production), as proposed. This section 
discusses the substantive changes to subpart F; additional minor 
corrections and clarifications are summarized in the Final Table of 
Revisions available in the docket for this rulemaking (Docket Id. No. 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526). The EPA received no comments objecting to the 
proposed changes to subpart F.
    We are finalizing amendments to 40 CFR part 98, subpart F, to 
improve the quality of the data collected under Part 98 and improve the 
U.S. GHG Inventory. As proposed, we are requiring reporting of two data 
elements that influence perfluorocarbon (PFC) emissions from aluminum 
production: annual average anode effect minutes per cell-day and annual 
smelter-specific slope coefficients. We are also finalizing our 
determination that the annual average of the anode effect minutes per 
cell day is CBI. See the memorandum ``Final Data Category Assignments 
and Confidentiality Determinations for Data Elements in the Proposed 
2015 Revisions'' in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for additional 
information. In conjunction with our determination that the annual 
average of the anode effect minutes is CBI, we are revising, as 
proposed, our previous finding that the annual smelter-specific slope 
coefficients, which are inputs to emission equations, present 
disclosure concerns associated with this input to equation, and are 
finalizing our proposal to collect these data. Note that we will 
continue to use IVT to verify the results of Equation F-2. See the 
preamble to the proposed rule (81 FR 2553) for additional information 
on this change.
    As shown in Table 4 of this preamble and consistent with the 
description of amendments in section I.E.2 of this preamble, all 
amendments to subpart F will be effective on January 1, 2018 as 
proposed and will be reflected starting with RY2017 reports that are 
submitted in 2018. No comments were received on the timing of revisions 
to subpart F.

E. Subpart G--Ammonia Manufacturing

    In this action, we are finalizing several amendments to subpart G 
of Part 98 (Ammonia Manufacturing). This section discusses all of the 
final revisions to subpart G. We are also finalizing as proposed 
confidentiality determinations for new data elements resulting from the 
revisions to subpart G; see section IV of this preamble and the 
memorandum ``Final Data Category Assignments and Confidentiality 
Determinations for Data Elements in the Proposed 2015 Revisions'' in 
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for additional information on the 
final category assignments and confidentiality determinations for this 
data element.
    The EPA received several comments for subpart G. Substantive 
comments are addressed in section III.E.2 of this preamble; see the 
document ``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas 
Reporting Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for 
Data Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart G.
1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart G
a. Revisions to Subpart G To Improve Quality of Data Collected in Part 
98 and Improve the U.S. GHG Inventory
    We are finalizing revisions that will allow the EPA to collect data 
that will improve the EPA's understanding of GHG emissions from ammonia 
manufacturing while generally resulting in only a slight increase in 
burden for reporters. As proposed, we are amending 40 CFR 98.76(a) to 
require reporting of annual ammonia production for facilities where a 
continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS) is used to measure 
CO2 emissions; 40 CFR 98.76(b)(2) to require reporting of 
annual feedstock consumption; and 40 CFR 98.76(b)(7) to require 
reporting of annual average carbon content.
b. Other Amendments to Subpart G
    We are finalizing multiple amendments to subpart G to clarify the 
EPA's intentions related to the reporting of annual ammonia production 
and annual methanol production and making one change from proposal.
    The change from proposal is with regard to the proposed revisions 
to 40 CFR 98.76(b)(15) to indicate that facilities must report the 
annual methanol production for each process unit in 40 CFR 98.76(b)(15) 
regardless of whether the methanol is subsequently destroyed, vented, 
or sold as product. As discussed in section III.E.2 of this preamble, 
the EPA received comments objecting to the proposed revisions, and for 
the reasons discussed below is instead clarifying that while 
intentionally produced methanol must be reported, it is not necessary 
to report the unintended generation of methanol as a by-product. The 
final rule revises 40 CFR 98.76(b)(15) to ``Annual quantity of methanol 
intentionally produced as a desired product, for each process unit 
(metric tons).''
2. Summary of Comments and Responses on Subpart G
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to the proposed amendments to subpart G. See the document 
``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for Data 
Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. No 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart G.
    Comment: One commenter opposed the EPA's proposal to clarify 40 CFR 
98.76(b)(15) to add that annual methanol production must be reported 
``regardless of whether the methanol is subsequently destroyed, vented, 
or sold as product.'' The commenter opposed reporting of methanol that 
is vented or destroyed as part of the annual methanol production. The 
commenter stated that the amount of methanol produced does not 
contribute to the GHG emission calculations, which are based on fuel 
and feedstock. The commenter also asserted that the EPA should not 
attempt to capture the generation of by-products in the ammonia 
production process, due to the complexity of determining the amount of 
methanol vented or destroyed. The commenter noted that methanol is 
generated in the low temperature shift reaction portion of the ammonia 
manufacturing unit, and, in much

[[Page 89206]]

smaller quantities, in the high temperature shift reaction portion of 
the ammonia manufacturing unit. The commenter stated that methanol can 
leave the process in either a gaseous stream or as a process 
condensate. The commenter noted that some facilities use a low methanol 
catalyst in the low temperature shift reactor to control the amount of 
methanol produced. The commenter stated that process condensate is 
normally routed back into the condensate stripper where methanol is 
stripped and routed to the ammonia reformer for combustion. The 
commenter argued that this portion should not be accounted for in the 
amount of methanol destroyed.
    Response: The EPA agrees with the commenter that reporting of 
unintentional methanol production by subpart G reporters is not 
necessary. The current requirement is to report ``Annual methanol 
production for each process unit (metric tons),'' without limitation. 
As demonstrated by reports in RY2014 and RY2015, the amount of methanol 
from most subpart G reporters, which are thought to be reporting 
unintentional production, is very small relative to the total quantity 
of intentional methanol production being reported across the GHGRP 
(subparts G, P, and X). Reporters that have intentional methanol 
production are more likely to have existing mechanisms in place for 
measuring the quantity than reporters that have unintentional methanol 
production. Therefore, the burden for quantifying the small amounts of 
unintentional methanol production is expected to be higher than the 
burden required to report intentional methanol production. In striking 
a balance between the burden required to quantify the small amount of 
unintentional methanol production and the EPA's potential uses for the 
methanol data being requested, the EPA has decided not to finalize the 
proposed language for 40 CFR 98.76(b)(15), which was ``Annual methanol 
production for each process unit (metric tons), regardless of whether 
the methanol is subsequently destroyed, vented, or sold as product.'' 
Instead, the EPA is revising this requirement to read: ``Annual 
quantity of methanol intentionally produced as a desired product, for 
each process unit (metric tons).'' These final revisions are included 
in the Final Table of Revisions to this rulemaking (see Docket Id. No. 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526).
3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart G Become Effective
    As shown in Table 4 of this preamble and consistent with the 
description of amendments in section I.E.2 of this preamble, all 
amendments to subpart G will be effective on January 1, 2018 as 
proposed and will be reflected starting with RY2017 reports that are 
submitted in 2018.
    We received comment on our proposed implementation schedule for 
subpart G requesting an additional year before implementation of the 
new reporting requirements (i.e., annual ammonia production for 
facilities using a continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS), annual 
consumption, and annual average carbon content data) to align the 
implementation schedule with the schedule for implementing the new 
reporting requirements for subpart V--Nitric Acid Production (i.e., 
RY2018). The commenter requested this change because some facilities 
are subject to both subparts. The EPA does not agree that an additional 
year is needed for implementation of the new reporting requirements for 
subpart G or that the reporting schedules for these amendments for 
subparts G and V need to be aligned. First, all existing ammonia 
production plants are already required to report ammonia production 
under 40 CFR 98.76(b)(14) (i.e., these data have been reported for 
RY2014 and RY2015), and according to the GHG reports for subpart G 
received to date, no existing ammonia production plants subject to 
subpart G use CEMS. Therefore, while the new requirement for reporters 
using CEMS to report annual ammonia production introduces no additional 
burden to plants currently reporting to the GHGRP, should any plants 
choose to use CEMS in the future, the requirement will be in place. 
Second, the new requirement for reporters to calculate and report 
annual consumption and annual average carbon content (using monthly 
data) introduces only a minor burden because these facilities are 
already required to use monthly consumption and carbon content data to 
calculate emissions, including entering these data into IVT. Third, the 
requirements of subparts G and V have no common input parameters, 
therefore, there is no need for facilities to coordinate reporting of 
the data reported under subparts G and V. As such, the EPA sees no 
compelling reason to delay the implementation schedule for subpart G. 
Therefore, the final amendments to subpart G will be effective January 
1, 2018, and will be reflected starting with RY2017 reports, as 
proposed.

F. Subpart I--Electronics Manufacturing

    In this action, we are finalizing several amendments to subpart I 
of Part 98 (Electronics Manufacturing). This section discusses the 
substantive revisions to subpart I; additional minor amendments, 
corrections, and clarifications are summarized in the Final Table of 
Revisions available in the docket for this rulemaking (Docket Id. No. 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526). We are also finalizing confidentiality 
determinations for new data elements resulting from these revisions to 
subpart I; see section IV of this preamble and the memorandum ``Final 
Data Category Assignments and Confidentiality Determinations for Data 
Elements in the Proposed 2015 Revisions'' in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2015-0526 for additional information on the final category assignments 
and confidentiality determinations for these data elements.
    The EPA received several comments for subpart I. Substantive 
comments are addressed in section III.F.2 of this preamble; see the 
document ``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas 
Reporting Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for 
Data Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart I.
1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart I
    This section discusses the substantive revisions to subpart I to 
improve the quality of data collected under Part 98. We are finalizing 
the proposed revisions to Equation I-24 with some modifications as 
described in section III.F.2 of this preamble. We are also finalizing 
clarifications to one provision of the Triennial Report requirement at 
40 CFR 98.96(y) with some modifications from the proposal as described 
in section III.F.2 of this preamble. We are finalizing all of the 
proposed minor corrections presented in the Table of 2015 Revisions 
(see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526), with one additional change 
to Table I-4 as discussed in this section.
    As part of the stack testing methodology in 40 CFR 98.93(i), 
Equation I-24 calculates the weighted-average destruction or removal 
efficiency for individual F-GHGs across process types. The equation is 
intended to account for the fact that emissions from different process 
types are destroyed with different efficiencies. Previously, Equation 
I-24 weighted the fraction of the fluorinated GHG destroyed by the 
quantity of gas consumed by each process type. However, the quantity 
and type of gas flowing into destruction devices are also

[[Page 89207]]

affected by (1) The quantity of each input gas dissociated by the 
process (which varies across process types and sub-types) and (2) the 
quantity of by-product gas generated by the process (which also varies 
across process types and sub-types). The revision (and renaming) of 
Equation I-24A, for input gases, and the addition of Equation I-24B, 
for by-product gases, enable facilities to properly account for these 
effects. The addition of Equation I-24B also defines a term, 
dkf, which is used in several other equations but has not 
previously been defined.
    For the triennial technology report required of certain facilities 
as specified in 40 CFR 98.96(y), we are revising paragraph (y)(2)(iv) 
to require that any utilization and by-product formation rate data 
include the input gases used and measured, the utilization rates 
measured, the by-product formation rates measured, the process type, 
the process sub-type for chamber clean processes, the wafer size, and 
the method used for the measurements. We are requiring that any 
destruction or removal efficiency (DRE) data include the input gases 
used and measured, the destruction and removal efficiency measured, the 
process type, and the method used for the measurements.
    The data elements specified in the final amendments to 40 CFR 
98.96(y)(2)(iv) differ in several respects from the data elements 
specified in the proposed amendments. First, the final rule limits the 
required data elements to the parameters used to categorize the current 
sets of default emission factors and DREs or, in the case of the 
measurement method, to assure data quality. We are not finalizing the 
proposed requirements for facilities to provide the film type, the 
substrate type, and the linewidth or technology node. Second, the final 
rule includes two slightly different sets of requirements for reporting 
utilization and byproduct formation rate data and for reporting 
destruction or removal efficiency data; these different requirements 
reflect the different criteria used to classify the corresponding 
default factors in subpart I. Finally, we have removed the 
qualification ``where available'' from the list of required data 
elements. These modifications to the proposed requirements arose from 
public comments and from our review of the purpose of the requirements, 
as discussed in section III.F.2 of this preamble.
    In this final rule, we are finalizing revisions that we proposed to 
five default factors in Table I-3 for 150 and 200 mm fabs. This is to 
correct typographical and calculation errors. One of the corrected 
default factors, the 1-Ui value for NF3 used in the remote 
plasma clean process subtype, is intended to be the same as the 
corresponding value for 300 mm fabs in Table I-4. (This is because a 
single dataset was used to develop the 1-Ui value for NF3 
used in remote plasma clean across both sets of wafer sizes.) However, 
we did not propose to correct the value in Table I-4. Because the 
correction is applicable to Table I-4 as well as to Table I-3, and we 
received no negative comments on the Table I-3 correction, we are 
making the correction to Table I-4 in this final rule. The correction 
revises the default I-Ui value for NF3 used in the remote 
plasma clean subtype from 0.018 to 0.017.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses on Subpart I
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to the proposed amendments to subpart I. See the document 
``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for Data 
Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. No 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart I.
    Comment: One commenter expressed concern that the revisions to 
Equation I-24, including revision of Equation I-24 and the addition of 
Equation I-24B for stack testing at semiconductor fabs, would require 
reporters to essentially employ both the default emission factor method 
and the stack testing method, because the revised equations would 
require that facilities perform calculations using the default emission 
factor method to make adjustments for variations in the usage and 
performance of abatement. The commenter noted that any revisions to the 
default emissions factors would therefore change the emissions of a 
facility that performs stack testing. The commenter argued that the 
proposed revisions would discourage the use of the stack testing 
method, especially for facilities with abatement systems installed.
    Finally, the commenter argued that the EPA has not demonstrated 
that the added complexity and cost will result in a more accurate 
emissions estimate.
    Response: We demonstrated that the added accuracy of the revised 
equations justifies their added complexity in the preamble to the 
proposed rule and are providing further explanation here. As we 
explained in the preamble to the proposed rule (81 FR 2555, January 15, 
2016), we proposed these revisions to Equation I-24 because the 
original equation relied on GHG gas consumption by process type, rather 
than GHG emissions by process type, to determine the weighted average 
DRE. As explained in the proposal preamble, the original equation 
introduced several sources of error because it did not account for 
either input gas utilization or by-product formation, both of which can 
make the distribution of emissions of an F-GHG between process types 
very different from the distribution of consumption of that F-GHG 
between process types. These sources of error are eliminated in the 
revised Equations I-24 A and I-24B.
    We disagree with the commenter that the added complexity of the 
revised equations is excessive and will discourage use of the stack-
test method. The original Equation I-24 required users to apportion gas 
usage by process type (i.e., to either etching/wafer cleaning or 
chamber cleaning). The revised equations require reporters to 
additionally apportion gases used in chamber cleaning to the 
appropriate sub-type, but the added burden of this step is expected to 
be low. We analyzed gas usage patterns in RY2014 and found that, on 
average, between 56 and 80 percent of the time that a fab used an F-GHG 
in chamber cleaning, the fab used that F-GHG in only one chamber 
cleaning subtype.\5\ Only five to eight percent of the time was an F-
GHG used in all three chamber cleaning subtypes. Once they have 
apportioned gas usage, reporters will simply apply the default 
utilization rates and byproduct formation rates from Tables I-3 and I-4 
to the apportioned gases, and this step can be simplified with the use 
of a spreadsheet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The 56-percent figure was based on the assumptions that (1) 
Every combination of wafer size and chamber cleaning process subtype 
for which CF4 or C2F6 emissions 
were reported used CF4 or C2F6 as 
an input gas and (2) emissions of particular F-GHGs that were 
reported as zero represent very small emissions rather than no 
emissions of that F-GHG. The 80-percent figure was based on the 
assumptions that (1) For combinations of wafer size and chamber 
cleaning process subtype that have no input gas emission factors for 
CF4 or C2F6, but that do have by-
product generation factors for these gases, CF4 or 
C2F6 are emitted as by-product gases rather 
than input gases, and (2) emissions of particular F-GHGs that were 
reported as zero are truly zero.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The commenter does not address how the term dkf, which 
is used in several equations in the stack test method (e.g., Equations 
I-20 and I-22), would be defined without the addition of Equation I-
24B. We note that equating dkf to the previous definition of 
dif (that is, weighting process types by input gas 
consumption rather than by by-product

[[Page 89208]]

emissions) would lead to large errors in the weighted DRE for by-
products because the shares of F-GHGs consumed by the two process types 
can be very different from the shares of F-GHGs emitted as by-products 
from the two process types (particularly for CF4 and 
C2F6). For example, based on the 2009 and 2010 F-
GHG consumption data that were provided by the semiconductor industry 
to EPA, the weighted average DRE for by-product 
C2F6 would be 0.6 based on consumption but 0.97 
based on by-product emissions, using the Table I-16 default DREs for 
both process types.
    In response to the commenter's assertion that the revision 
effectively requires users of the stack method to employ the emission 
factor method as well as stack testing procedures, we reiterate that 
the incremental effort associated with implementing the revision is 
expected to be modest, as discussed above. We also note that facilities 
using the stack method are already required to use a modified version 
of the emission factor method to perform preliminary estimates of 
emissions and to estimate emissions from stack systems that are not 
tested. (See 40 CFR 98.93(i)(1) and (4)).
    Finally, regarding the impact of changes in default emission 
factors on the calculated emissions of facilities that use stack 
testing, we anticipate that this impact will be considerably smaller 
than the initial impact of weighting process-type and sub-type DREs by 
F-GHG emissions rather than by consumption, particularly where most 
emissions are by-product emissions from a process type other than the 
process type that consumes the F-GHG. In this case, the process that 
emits the F-GHG by-product but does not consume it is given a weight of 
almost zero when consumption is used as the weighting factor; but it is 
given a weight of nearly one when by-product emissions are used as the 
weighting factor. In contrast, all subsequent changes to emission 
factors, with the exception of the very largest ones, are likely to 
have relatively limited impact on this weighting, and consequently on 
calculated emissions.
    Comment: One commenter expressed concern that the proposed list of 
the data elements to be submitted with emission factor and DRE data in 
the Triennial Report would increase burden on reporters, was 
inconsistent with the terms of the final rule negotiated between the 
EPA and industry members, and would result in the collection of data 
that were not relevant to setting accurate emission factors. This 
commenter argued that the EPA should wait until after the submission of 
the first Triennial Report in 2017 before finalizing any revisions to 
the requirements for the report. The commenter stated that some of the 
data elements went beyond the original goals for the Triennial Report 
and would require facilities submitting reports to collect additional 
data that are not typically collected during testing and that were 
found not to be relevant to emissions during the development of the 
current subpart I requirements. Specifically, the commenter argued that 
input gas, wafer size, and process type were sufficient to characterize 
emissions considering precision, accuracy, and technical feasibility, 
and that several other data elements, such as film type and technology 
node, were not statistically relevant to calculating emission factors.
    The commenter also asserted that several of the proposed data 
requirements were irrelevant to characterizing DRE data, including film 
type, substrate type, linewidth or technology node, process type, and 
utilization rates measured.
    Finally, the commenter claimed that the information being sought 
raised confidentiality issues because the industry considers the 
requested product and technology information to be CBI. The commenter 
argued that, although linewidth estimates were available in publicly 
available databases such as the World Fab Forecast, those data were 
only estimates and their accuracy was questionable. Thus, disclosing 
linewidth or technology node threatens the disclosure of intellectual 
property. The commenter concluded by stating that several of the 
proposed data elements, such as film type and technology node, were the 
same types of data that were required in the recipe-specific emission 
factor reporting that was removed from the rule in the amendments that 
were finalized on November 13, 2013 (78 FR 68162) as a result of the 
industry's petition for reconsideration and EPA's grant of the 
petition.
    Response: As noted above, the EPA is finalizing a list of data 
elements that must be submitted as part of emission factor and DRE 
measurements included in the Triennial Report. After considering this 
comment, we have limited this list to those parameters that are 
absolutely necessary for relating the new data to the existing data and 
to the corresponding default emissions factors and DRE factors. Rather 
than specifying additional parameters that may affect emission and DRE 
factors, the EPA is relying on the existing requirements of 40 CFR 
98.96(y)(2), which state in part that the Triennial Report must 
describe (1) ``How the gases and technologies used in semiconductor 
manufacturing using 200 mm and 300 mm wafers in the United States have 
changed in the past three years and whether any of the identified 
changes are likely to have affected the emissions characteristics of 
semiconductor manufacturing processes in such a way that the default 
utilization and by-product formation rates or default destruction or 
removal efficiency factors of this subpart may need to be updated'' and 
(2) ``the effect on emissions of the implementation of new process 
technologies and/or finer line width processes in 200 mm and 300 mm 
technologies, the introduction of new tool platforms, and the 
introduction of new processes on previously tested platforms.'' We have 
concluded that these requirements, in combination with the introductory 
sentence of 40 CFR 98.96(y)(2)(iv), which requires reporters to 
``provide any utilization and by-product formation rates and/or 
destruction or removal efficiency data that have been collected in the 
previous three years that support the changes in semiconductor 
manufacturing processes described in the report,'' already require 
reporters to explain how each measurement illustrates one or more of 
the changes in semiconductor manufacturing processes described in the 
report. As discussed below, this in turn requires reporters to discuss 
the parameters whose changes are (or are not) affecting emission 
factors and emissions.
    As noted in the proposed rule, the EPA's intent in specifying the 
list of data requirements is to allow us to better understand the data 
being submitted and its implications for the current subpart I default 
utilization rates, by-product formation rates, and DREs. To achieve 
this goal, the submitted data must include information on two 
relationships: The relationship between the new data and the existing 
emission factors and DREs, and the relationship between the new data 
and the technological developments in semiconductor manufacturing. The 
relatively limited list of parameters in the final revision to 40 CFR 
98.96(y)(2)(iv) illuminates the first relationship, while the 
explanation of the link between the data and the changes in 
semiconductor manufacturing illuminates the second.
    The proposed amendment to 40 CFR 98.96(y)(2)(iv) would have 
required the submission of the specified data elements only ``where 
available.'' Thus, it would not have required facilities submitting the 
Triennial Report to

[[Page 89209]]

collect any new data, but only to submit data that were already in 
their possession (and, as specified in the November 13, 2013 amendments 
to subpart I, that supported the description of the technological 
changes in the Triennial Report). Nevertheless, we agree with the 
commenter that some of the proposed data elements, specifically, film 
type, linewidth, and substrate type, would not necessarily be helpful 
to illuminating how the processes or DRE equipment for which the 
submitted measurements were made are different from the processes and 
equipment that are represented by the current default factors. First, 
these particular parameters may not be the key drivers that result in a 
new set of processes having different emission factors from the old set 
of processes. Second, by itself, information on linewidth and substrate 
type would be difficult to relate to the data on which the current 
factors are based because this information was not included in the 
earlier data.
    We believe that the existing text of 40 CFR 98.96(y)(2) requires 
reporters to explain how the measurements illustrate the impacts of the 
changes in semiconductor manufacturing described in the report. This 
allows reporters to focus on the relevant parameters and to explain how 
and how much they are influencing emission factors and emissions, which 
is more informative than simply providing the value of a parameter by 
itself. For example, where a new tool platform has been introduced, 
e.g., because a tool manufacturer is now supplying a market that it did 
not supply previously, the Triennial Report should describe this 
development and note that the new data have expanded the set of 
represented tool manufacturers for a particular gas and process type 
relative to the old data. (It would not be necessary for the reporter 
to specify the ``new'' manufacturer.) \6\ Similarly, where emission 
factors have changed because a new film type that includes less (or 
more) carbon is being manufactured, the Triennial Report should note 
that the decrease (or increase) in carbon has resulted in a lower (or 
higher) CF4 emission factor from NF3 chamber 
cleaning processes. This type of qualitative description allows 
Triennial Report submitters to avoid identifying exact values or 
entities that may pose disclosure concerns. (While the data elements 
included in 40 CFR 98.96(y)(2)(i), (ii), (iii), and (v) have been 
determined to be CBI, semiconductor manufacturers have historically 
been reluctant to submit certain sensitive data despite this 
determination.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ A similar approach was used by the Semiconductor Industry 
Association (SIA) to describe the representativeness of emission 
factor measurements with respect to tool manufacturers during the 
development of the November 13, 2013 final amendments to subpart I. 
(See, e.g., SIA's ``Report to EPA on Etch Factor Proposal for Fab 
GHG Emissions Reporting,'' page 18, EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0028-0074.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA is aware of multiple parameters that may affect emission 
factors and DREs. For emission factors, these include radio frequency 
power, pressure, flow rate, film type, feature type, and tool platform 
in addition to process type and wafer size, and this list is probably 
not exhaustive. For DREs, these include equipment make and model and 
age as well as input gas and process type. The reason that only some of 
these parameters were used to establish the categories for the default 
emission factors in Tables I-3 and I-4 and for the default DREs in 
Table I-16 was not because the other parameters did not influence 
emissions.\7\ Rather, it was because adding one or more other 
parameters would have increased the burden and complexity of the 
calculations under subpart I and would have introduced another source 
of error from the additional F-GHG apportioning required, offsetting 
the decrease in model error associated with including the additional 
parameter (see 77 FR 63551). Thus, if one or more of the parameters 
listed above is a driver behind a change in emission factors for 
certain sets of processes in the field, facilities should note this in 
their reports. Acknowledging the relevance of a parameter does not 
compel the EPA to expand the number of categories of default factors in 
Tables I-3, I-4, or I-16 to reflect the influence of that parameter, 
but helps us to understand how and why the new data are different from 
the old data, and therefore whether and how the current default 
emission factors and DREs may need to be updated. Again, this is the 
goal of the revision to 40 CFR 98.96(y)(2)(iv). We anticipate that, 
except in extraordinary circumstances, updates would consist of 
revisions to emission factors and DREs in the current set of 
categories, not an increase in the number of categories.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ For example, the report cited by the contractor (``Report to 
EPA on Etch Factor Proposal for Fab GHG Emissions Reporting,'' 
Docket item number EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0028-0074) showed that radio 
frequency power had the second-highest R squared value of any 
single-variable model.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA agrees that some of the proposed data requirements are not 
relevant to DREs, and the EPA has therefore distinguished in the final 
rule between the data required for DREs and the data required for 
emission factors in the Triennial Report. However, the EPA disagrees 
with the commenter's assertion that process type is not relevant to 
DREs, which is contradicted by the fact that the current rule includes 
different sets of default DREs for etch processes and chamber clean 
processes.\8\ Thus, the EPA has retained ``process type'' in the list 
of data elements that must be submitted with DRE data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ During the development of the current subpart I 
requirements, SIA supported using process type to organize and apply 
default DREs. In the document titled, ``Briefing Paper on Abatement 
Issues: Destruction Removal Efficiency (DRE), SIA stated, ``SIA is 
proposing an alternative method to group abatement systems and apply 
the DREs to F-gas emissions. This alternative is based on a 
combination of the process types [emphasis added] as defined in the 
MRR and the gas or gas groups being treated by the abatement units'' 
(SIA. Briefing Paper on Abatement Issues: Destruction Removal 
Efficiency (DRE), January 10, 2012, EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0028-0045).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because the limited sets of data elements required by this final 
rule should always be available and are necessary for the measurements 
to be meaningful, we have removed the qualification ``where available'' 
from the lists of required data elements for emission factor and DRE 
measurements.
3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart I Become Effective
    As shown in Table 4 of this preamble and consistent with the 
description of amendments in section I.E.1 of this preamble, all 
amendments to subpart I will be effective on January 1, 2017 as 
proposed and will be reflected starting with RY2016 reports that are 
submitted in 2017. No comments were received on the timing of revisions 
to subpart I.

G. Subpart N--Glass Production

    In this action, we are finalizing amendments to subpart N of Part 
98 (Glass Production) as proposed. This section discusses the 
substantive revisions to subpart N; additional minor corrections are 
summarized in the Final Table of Revisions available in the docket for 
this rulemaking (Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526).
    The EPA received only supportive comments for subpart N; therefore, 
there are no changes from proposal to the final rule based on these 
comments. See the document ``Summary of Public Comments and Responses 
for Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality 
Determinations for Data Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Rule'' in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of 
all comments and responses related to subpart N.

[[Page 89210]]

    We are finalizing amendments that are intended to clarify the rule 
requirements in subpart N, while resulting in no impact on burden for 
reporters. Specifically, the revisions clarify that a default value of 
1.0 can be used for the fraction of calcination and the carbonate mass 
fraction for each carbonate type contained in the raw materials charged 
to the furnace. As proposed, we are revising 40 CFR 98.144(b), 40 CFR 
98.144(c), 40 CFR 98.144(d), 40 CFR 98.146(b)(5), and 40 CFR 
98.146(b)(7) to clarify that no further chemical analysis is required 
if the default value of 1.0 is selected. These amendments will clarify 
the original intent of the requirements and address multiple Help Desk 
questions. Additional minor editorial corrections may be found in the 
Final Table of Revisions in the docket for this rulemaking (Docket Id. 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526).
    As shown in Table 4 of this preamble and consistent with the 
description of amendments in section I.E.2 of this preamble, all 
amendments to subpart N will be effective on January 1, 2018 as 
proposed and will be reflected starting with RY2017 reports that are 
submitted in 2018. No comments were received on the timing of revisions 
to subpart N.

H. Subpart O--HCFC-22 Production and HFC-23 Destruction

1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart O
    We are finalizing all amendments to subpart O of Part 98 (HCFC-22 
Production and HFC-23 Destruction) as proposed. This section discusses 
all of the revisions to subpart O. We are also finalizing as proposed 
confidentiality determinations for new data elements resulting from the 
revisions to subpart O; see section IV of this preamble and the 
memorandum ``Final Data Category Assignments and Confidentiality 
Determinations for Data Elements in the Proposed 2015 Revisions'' in 
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for additional information on the 
final category assignments and confidentiality determinations for these 
data elements.
    The EPA received several comments for subpart O. Substantive 
comments are addressed in section III.H.2 of this preamble; see the 
document ``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas 
Reporting Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for 
Data Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart O.
a. Revisions to Subpart O To Streamline Implementation
    This section discusses the amendments to subpart O to simplify and 
streamline GHGRP requirements and increase the efficiency of the report 
submittal process. We are finalizing these revisions to subpart O as 
proposed. Specifically, we are removing the reporting requirements at 
40 CFR 98.156(d)(2), (3), and (4), which include, respectively, the 
concentration (mass fraction) of HFC-23 at the outlet of the 
destruction device, the flow rate at the outlet of the destruction 
device in kilograms per hour, and the emission rate calculated from 
these two parameters. As discussed in the proposed rule, reporting of 
these data elements is no longer needed due to previous revisions to 
subpart O (81 FR 2556).
b. Revisions to Subpart O To Improve the Quality of Data Collected 
Under Part 98
    This section discusses the amendments to subpart O to improve the 
quality of data collected under Part 98. We are finalizing these 
revisions to subpart O as proposed. Specifically, we are (1) 
Reinstating in 40 CFR 98.156(d) reporting of the method used to 
calculate the revised destruction efficiency and (2) requiring 
facilities to report HCFC-22 production and HFC-23 emissions for each 
HCFC-22 production process rather than for the facility as a whole. As 
described in the preamble to proposed rule (81 FR2556), these 
amendments will allow the EPA to collect data that will improve the 
EPA's understanding of GHG emissions from HCFC-22 production and HFC-23 
destruction while generally resulting in only a slight increase in 
burden to reporters.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses on Subpart O
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to the proposed amendments to subpart O. See the document 
``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for Data 
Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. No 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart O.
    Comment: One commenter disagreed with the EPA's proposed 
reinstatement of the requirement to report the method used to calculate 
the revised destruction efficiency. In the preamble to the proposed 
rule, the EPA stated that this data element was inadvertently removed 
by the Final Inputs Rule and was important for understanding data 
quality. The commenter argued that this rationale did not justify 
reinstatement of the data element, especially given that the previous 
change was made just 18 months ago. The commenter noted that the EPA 
was also proposing to reinstate previously removed data elements for 
other subparts, and expressed the opinion that the number of regulatory 
revisions in the GHGRP, which has been effect for six years, should be 
decreasing, not increasing. The commenter concluded that the EPA should 
avoid removing and reinstating data elements as such changes ``place an 
undue burden on reporters and undermine confidence in the GHGRP.''
    Response: While we agree with the commenter that it is important to 
minimize instances where the EPA inadvertently removes a data element 
and then reinstates it, we disagree that avoiding such reversals is 
more important than correcting an error that hinders our understanding 
of data quality. As noted in the preamble to the proposed rule (81 FR 
2556), reporting of the method used to calculate the revised 
destruction efficiency helps us to understand the rigor of the method 
and the reliability of the resulting revised destruction efficiency. We 
do not believe that the reinstatement of this data element, which will 
be implemented through a revision to the e-GGRT data reporting system, 
places an undue burden on reporters. Similarly, we do not believe that 
the reinstatement represents an acceleration of the rate of amendment 
of Part 98 or undermines confidence in the GHGRP. The Final Inputs Rule 
removed 378 data elements from Part 98 (79 FR 63752); only three of 
these are being reinstated by this final rule.
3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart O Become Effective
    As shown in Table 4 of this preamble and consistent with the 
description of amendments in section I.E.2 of this preamble, all 
amendments to subpart O will be effective on January 1, 2018 as 
proposed and will be reflected starting with RY2017 reports that are 
submitted in 2018. No comments were received on the timing of revisions 
to subpart O.

I. Subpart Q--Iron and Steel Production

    In this action we are finalizing amendments to subpart Q of Part 98 
(Iron and Steel Production). This section discusses one substantive 
revision to

[[Page 89211]]

subpart Q; additional minor amendments, corrections, and clarifications 
are summarized in the Final Table of Revisions available in the docket 
for this rulemaking (Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526). The EPA 
received no comments objecting to the proposed revisions to subpart Q.
    We are finalizing a revision to subpart Q to align with final 
revisions to subpart Y (Petroleum Refineries). Under 40 CFR 98.172(b), 
facilities that report under subpart Q are referred to provisions in 40 
CFR part 98, subpart Y, for reporting CO2 emissions from 
flares that burn blast furnace gas or coke oven gas. The final 
revisions clarify that subpart Q facilities should exclude pilot gas 
from the flare gas GHG emissions. Additional information regarding 
these final revisions may be found in section III.M.1 of this preamble.
    As shown in Table 4 of this preamble and consistent with the 
description of amendments in section I.E.2 of this preamble, all 
amendments to subpart Q will be effective on January 1, 2018 as 
proposed and will be reflected starting with RY2017 reports that are 
submitted in 2018. No comments were received on the timing of revisions 
to subpart Q.

J. Subpart S--Lime Manufacturing

    In this action we are finalizing several amendments to subpart S of 
Part 98 (Lime Manufacturing). This section discusses all final 
amendments to subpart S. We are also finalizing as proposed 
confidentiality determinations for new data elements resulting from the 
revisions to subpart S; see section IV of this preamble and the 
memorandum ``Final Data Category Assignments and Confidentiality 
Determinations for Data Elements in the Proposed 2015 Revisions'' in 
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for additional information on the 
final category assignments and confidentiality determinations for these 
data elements.
    The EPA received several comments for subpart S. Substantive 
comments are addressed in section III.J.2 of this preamble; see the 
document ``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas 
Reporting Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for 
Data Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart S.
1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart S
a. Revisions to Subpart S To Improve the Quality of Data Collected in 
Part 98
    The EPA is requiring as proposed reporting of three data elements 
that influence CO2 emissions from lime manufacturing: Annual 
emission factors for each lime product type produced, annual emission 
factors for each calcined byproduct/waste by lime type that is sold, 
and annual average results of chemical composition analysis of each 
type of lime product produced and calcined byproduct/waste sold.
    After consideration of comments received requesting clarity on how 
a reporter is to calculate annual emission factors, as described in 
section III.J.2 below, the EPA is finalizing 40 CFR 98.193(b)(2)(vi), 
(vii) and (viii), which contain new Equations S-5 to S-10 to calculate 
the 12-month average based on monthly emission factors for lime product 
type produced and calcined byproduct/waste by lime type that is sold, 
in addition to the associated monthly results of the chemical 
composition analysis of each type of lime product produced and calcined 
byproduct/waste that is sold. As described in the preamble to the 
proposed rule (81 FR 2557), collecting these data will allow us to 
understand why emissions have increased or decreased in a particular 
year or over longer periods. Thus they are important for informing the 
development of future GHG policies and programs. In addition, they are 
important for explaining U.S. emission trends through the U.S. GHG 
Inventory.
2. Summary of Comments and Response on Subpart S
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to the proposed amendments to subpart S. See the document 
``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for Data 
Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. No 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart S.
    Comment: Two commenters stated that the EPA should refrain from 
collecting and retaining highly confidential business information 
unless there is a compelling reason to do so. In this case, the 
commenters assert that an assessment or evaluation of emission factors 
over long periods of time will not be a reliable indicator of why 
overall GHG emissions may have increased or decreased. The commenters 
explain that calcination-related emissions make up approximately 54 
percent of total CO2 emissions in the lime industry, with 
minimal variability in emission factors month to month or year to year 
for the various product or calcined byproduct/waste type produced. 
Further, the commenters state that changes and variability in emissions 
are far more likely to be influenced by changes in production which are 
driven by market conditions, and to a lesser extent from variability in 
fuel combustion emissions which are already reported under the GHG 
Reporting Rule, subpart C. The commenters conclude that the proposed 
new data points will be of negligible value and at the same time will 
increase the potential for sensitive information to inadvertently be 
made public.
    Response: The EPA disagrees with the commenter that reporting new 
data points will be of negligible value. Emission factors in 
combination with production data do inform trends and represent an 
emission intensity or emission rate associated with the lime production 
process (e.g., GHG emission per unit of production by lime type). The 
collection of these data (annual average emissions factors for each 
lime product produced by type, annual emissions factors or calcined 
byproduct/waste by lime type that is sold, in addition to their 
associated annual average results from chemical composition analysis) 
will enhance the ability for EPA to understand emission trends, in 
particular emission rates at facilities to understand why emissions are 
decreasing or increasing, in conjunction with other existing data 
collected under GHGRP. In addition, collection of this information will 
also advance integration of GHGRP information into the U.S. GHG 
Inventory, and hence improve those estimates to better reflect industry 
conditions and related annual trends from lime production than the 
current use of IPCC default factors. The EPA adds that separate from 
this rulemaking the National Lime Association has provided comments to 
the EPA during the public review of the U.S. GHG Inventory (comments 
dated February 22, 2013, March 14, 2014) \9\ to discontinue use of IPCC 
default emissions factors, specifically for calcined byproducts

[[Page 89212]]

such as lime kiln dust. Further, as noted in these comments by National 
Lime Association on the U.S. GHG Inventory, this information required 
in this final rule will complement production data the EPA is currently 
collecting on lime produced that is sold under 40 CFR 98.196(a)(6) and 
(b)(18). Finally, this information will enhance EPA's ability to 
compare and verify emissions across subpart S, but also the EPA's 
ability to integrate GHGRP information is also enhanced by the ability 
to present a transparent and consistent basis for estimating emissions 
with underlying activity parameters within the inventory report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See ``Letter to Leif Hockstad, U.S. EPA, from William C. 
Herz, National Lime Association re: Draft Inventory of U.S. 
Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks 1990-2012'' and ``National Lime 
Association comments on Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions 
and Sinks (78 FR 12013, February 22, 2013), Arline M. Seeger''. 
Available in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA acknowledges commenter's concerns about the potentially 
confidential nature of the new data elements. As noted in the section 
III.J of the preamble to the proposed rule, the EPA determined these 
elements will be eligible for confidential treatment and will only 
publish information (e.g., national averages based on GHGRP facility-
level data) that meet criteria for aggregation and publication of CBI 
information in Federal Register Notification-9911-98-OAR.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See https://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/confidential-business-information-ghg-reporting#CBI_Data_Aggregation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment: One commenter requested that the EPA add clear and 
unambiguous language that defines ``Annual emission factor.'' The 
commenter stated that the proposed rule does not adequately explain how 
these elements are to be calculated. The commenter suggested that the 
most sensible and least burdensome method is a straight 12-month 
average of the monthly emission factors. According to the commenter, 
this calculation method should be explicitly prescribed in the final 
rule if the data points are required.
    Response: The EPA agrees that clear language, in particular 
prescribing the calculation method in the rule, will facilitate 
reporting of these new data points. Per the commenter's specific 
recommendation, the EPA has added 40 CFR 98.193(b)(2)(vi), (vii) and 
(viii), which contain new Equations S-5 to S-10 to specify calculation 
of the 12-month average based on monthly emission factors for lime 
product type produced and calcined byproduct/waste by lime type that is 
sold, in addition to the associated monthly results of the chemical 
composition analysis of each type of lime product produced and calcined 
byproduct/waste that is sold.
3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart S Become Effective
    As shown in Table 4 of this preamble and consistent with the 
description of amendments in section I.E.2 of this preamble, all 
amendments to subpart S will be effective on January 1, 2018 as 
proposed and will be reflected starting with RY2017 reports that are 
submitted in 2018. No comments were received on the timing of revisions 
to subpart S.

K. Subpart V--Nitric Acid Production

    In this action, we are finalizing three amendments to subpart V of 
Part 98 (Nitric Acid Production). This section discusses the revisions 
to subpart V; additional minor clarifications, including a change to 
the final rule, are summarized in the Final Table of Revisions 
available in the docket for this rulemaking (Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2015-0526). We are also finalizing as proposed confidentiality 
determinations for new data elements resulting from the revisions to 
subpart V; see section IV of this preamble and the memorandum ``Final 
Data Category Assignments and Confidentiality Determinations for Data 
Elements in the Proposed 2015 Revisions'' in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2015-0526 for additional information on the final category assignments 
and confidentiality determinations for these data elements.
    The EPA received only supportive comments for subpart V; therefore, 
there are no changes from proposal to the final rule based on these 
comments. See the document ``Summary of Public Comments and Responses 
for Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality 
Determinations for Data Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Rule'' in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of 
all comments and responses related to subpart V.
1. Revisions to Subpart V To Streamline Implementation
    We are finalizing one amendment that is intended to simplify and 
streamline the requirements of subpart V and increase the efficiency of 
the report submittal process. Subpart V provides the option of 
requesting the Administrator to approve an alternative method of 
determining N2O emissions from adipic acid production. 
Previously, reporters were required to request such approval annually 
in all circumstances. As proposed, we are revising 40 CFR 98.223(a)(2) 
to state conditions under which annual approval will not be required. 
As further discussed in section III.C of this preamble for subpart E, 
the EPA is allowing for use of the alternative method to be 
automatically approved for the next reporting year if the reporter 
received approval to use an alternative method in the previous 
reporting year and the method has not changed. Reporters who do not 
wish to change their method from the one approved for the prior year 
will only need to notify the EPA in the annual report submission that 
they are using an already approved alternative method. If, however, a 
reporter makes any changes to the previously-approved alternative 
method, then the reporter must request permission to use the revised 
method as stated in 40 CFR 98.223(a)(2). These revisions are being 
finalized as proposed.
2. Revisions to Subpart V To Improve the Quality of Data Collected 
Under Part 98
    We are finalizing two amendments that are intended to improve the 
quality of data collected under subpart V. First, as proposed, we are 
revising 40 CFR 98.220 to revise the definition of the source category 
to require reporting from all reporters that produce nitric acid, 
regardless of the nitric acid strength. We are finalizing an updated 
definition of nitric acid to apply to all nitric acid strengths, to 
ensure that subpart V reporting captures all N2O emissions 
related to the production of nitric acid. These final changes are 
summarized in the Final Table of Revisions available in the docket for 
this rulemaking (Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526).
    As proposed, we are also revising 40 CFR 98.226(h) to require 
reporting of the date of installation of any N2O abatement 
technology (if applicable). This date is readily available or already 
collected by reporters, and would not require additional data 
collection or monitoring. This data element can be carried over from 
one reporting year to the next. The reporter will not be required to 
make changes unless additional abatement technology is installed at a 
later date.
3. When the Revisions to Subpart V Become Effective
    Two of the three amendments to subpart V are effective on January 
1, 2018 as shown in Table 4 of this preamble and are consistent with 
the description of amendments effective on that date in section I.E.2 
of this preamble. The remaining amendment to subpart V is effective on 
January 1, 2019 as shown in Table 5 of this preamble. Although some 
amendments to subpart V are effective January 1, 2018 and some

[[Page 89213]]

are effective January 1, 2019, all amendments to subpart V will be 
reflected in RY2018 reports that are submitted in 2019 as shown in 
Tables 4 and 5 of this preamble. No comments were received on the 
timing of revisions to subpart V.
    The amendments to 40 CFR 98.220 of subpart V require new facilities 
to report to the GHGRP. We are making these revisions effective January 
1, 2018 so that the new reporters will take the necessary action to 
begin monitoring to be in full compliance with these revisions 
throughout 2018.
    The amendment to 40 CFR 98.223(a)(2) serves to simplify and 
streamline reporting for subpart V facilities by allowing for the use 
of an alternative method for determining N2O emissions if 
the reporter received approval to use an alternative method in a prior 
reporting year and the method has not changed. Reporters who do not 
wish to change their method from the one approved for the prior year 
will only need to notify the EPA in the annual report submission that 
they are using an already approved alternative method. If, however, a 
reporter makes any changes to the previously-approved alternative 
method, then the reporter must request permission to use the revised 
method as stated in 40 CFR 98.223(a)(2). Subpart V specifies that 
notification, if needed, of the use of alternative monitoring must be 
submitted within the first 30 days of the reporting year, which equates 
to January 30. Because the notification, if needed, must take place 
within the reporting year, we are making this amendment effective 
January 1, 2018, so that reporters will not have to notify the Agency 
if they are using the same alternative method as in the previous 
reporting year.
    The amendment to 40 CFR 98.226(h) adds one new reporting 
requirement to subpart V, the date of installation of any 
N2O abatement technology. This date is readily available to 
the reporters and is consistent with the data collection and monitoring 
in the current rule; because the reporter does not need to take action 
during the reporting year, this revision will be effective January 1, 
2019 and reflected in RY2018 reports that are submitted in 2019.

L. Subpart X--Petrochemical Production

    In this action we are finalizing several amendments, 
clarifications, and corrections to subpart X of Part 98 (Petrochemical 
Production). This section discusses the substantive revisions to 
subpart X. We are finalizing as proposed all of the minor amendments, 
corrections, and clarifications presented in the Final Table of 
Revisions (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526). We are also 
finalizing as proposed confidentiality determinations for new data 
elements resulting from the revisions to subpart X; see section IV of 
this preamble and the memorandum ``Final Data Category Assignments and 
Confidentiality Determinations for Data Elements in the Proposed 2015 
Revisions'' in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for additional 
information on the final category assignments and confidentiality 
determinations for these data elements.
    The EPA received several comments for subpart X. Substantive 
comments are addressed in section III.L.2 of this preamble; see the 
document ``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas 
Reporting Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for 
Data Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart X.
1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart X
a. Revisions to Subpart X To Streamline Implementation
    We are finalizing a revision to subpart X to align with the final 
revisions to subpart Y. Under 40 CFR 98.243(c), facilities that report 
to subpart X are referred to provisions in subpart Y for reporting 
CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions from 
flares. The final revisions clarify that facilities should exclude 
pilot gas from the flare gas GHG emissions. Additional information 
regarding these final revisions may be found in section III.M.1 of this 
preamble.
    We are also finalizing, with minor clarification to what was 
proposed (see section III.L.2 of this preamble), amendments to 40 CFR 
98.246(a)(5) to allow operators of an integrated ethylene dichloride 
(EDC) and vinyl chloride monomer (VCM) process to report the measured 
quantity of VCM and an estimate of the amount of EDC produced as an 
intermediate in the process. We are also finalizing as proposed a 
modification of 40 CFR 98.240(a) to indicate that a reporter may elect 
to consider the entire integrated process (rather than just the EDC 
operations) to be the petrochemical process for the purposes of 
complying with the mass balance method.
b. Revisions to Subpart X Improve the Quality of Data Collected in Part 
98
    We are finalizing as proposed the addition of reporting 
requirements for facilities that use the mass balance approach to 
determine emissions under 40 CFR 98.243(c) to report the annual average 
of the measurements of the carbon content and molecular weight of each 
feedstock and product reported under subpart X. Collection of the 
carbon content of each feedstock and product will enhance the quality 
and accuracy of the data collected under the GHGRP by providing 
additional information that will be used to verify the accuracy of 
reported emissions. Once this data element and the molecular weight of 
the feedstock or product are aggregated to the national level, they 
will be used to improve national emission estimates in the U.S. GHG 
Inventory, while resulting in only a slight increase in burden for 
reporters.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses on Subpart X
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to the proposed amendments to subpart X. See the document 
``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for Data 
Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. No. 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart X.
    Comment: One commenter expressed confusion with the revision of 40 
CFR 98.246(a)(5). According to the commenter, in the preamble, the EPA 
seems to require facilities using the optional method to report both 
the measured amount of VCM produced and an estimate of EDC produced as 
an intermediate (81 FR 2588). The commenter stated that the regulatory 
text does not appear to require this approach. The commenter provided 
suggested revisions to clarify the reporting requirements.
    Response: The final amendments to 40 CFR 98.246(a)(5) retain the 
proposed requirement to report either a measured or estimated amount of 
intermediate EDC produced in an integrated EDC/VCM process unit. We are 
retaining both options for this reporting requirement to provide 
reporters additional flexibility. Additionally, the final amendments to 
40 CFR 98.246(a)(5) clarify our intentions by making two changes to the 
proposed language. First, we have made a minor change to the proposed 
language under 40 CFR 98.246(a)(5) to

[[Page 89214]]

remove any reference to VCM produced being required to be reported 
under this specific paragraph of the rule. This revision does not 
change the fact that the amount of VCM produced in an integrated EDC/
VCM process unit must still be reported, regardless of whether the 
reported amount of intermediate EDC produced is estimated or measured, 
as reporting of the amount of VCM produced is already required under 
the reporting requirement for all products in 40 CFR 98.246(a)(13) and 
we neither proposed nor intended for this revision to make any changes 
to 40 CFR 98.246(a)(13). This minor change from proposal is intended to 
clarify the revision and eliminate the proposed duplicative requirement 
for reporting of VCM production. Second, we have made a change to the 
proposed language in subpart X to require that the estimated quantity 
of EDC is to be based on process knowledge and best available data.
    The commenter recommended removing the proposed option for 
reporting the measured quantity of EDC for an integrated EDC/VCM 
process. Although we expect that a reporter that elects to consider an 
integrated EDC/VCM process to be the petrochemical process unit is 
unlikely to measure the amount of intermediate EDC produced, we do not 
want to preclude that possibility. Thus, we have retained both proposed 
reporting options for the amount of intermediate EDC produced in the 
final rule. After further consideration of the comment, we realized 
that the commenter also may have been confused because the proposed 
option to report a measured quantity of EDC did not mention reporting 
the amount of VCM. Although the proposed revision to 40 CFR 
98.246(a)(5) did not indicate that the amount of VCM must be reported 
for such processes when the reported amount of intermediate EDC is 
based on measurements, the amount of VCM is currently, and would still 
have been, required to be reported under 40 CFR 98.246(a)(13); this 
requirement is unchanged in the final rule. To further clarify this 
point, we removed any mention of VCM from 40 CFR 98.246(a)(5) in the 
final rule to specify that only intermediate EDC production for any 
integrated EDC/VCM process unit that a reporter elects to consider as 
the petrochemical process unit would be reported under 40 CFR 
98.246(a)(5). VCM production for any integrated EDC/VCM process unit 
that a reporter elects to consider as the petrochemical process unit 
will continue to be reported under 40 CFR 98.246(a)(13). This change is 
intended to reduce confusion and remove duplicative reporting 
requirements for VCM production from these process units. Additionally, 
we have clarified subpart X to specify that if the reporter elects to 
report an estimated value, the estimated value is to be based on 
process knowledge and best available data. This additional language 
should provide guidance to reporters with regard to how the estimate of 
intermediate EDC production is to be determined, which will help to 
further reduce confusion over the revised requirements in 98.246(a)(5). 
This language is consistent with EPA's intentions in the proposal for 
how reporters should determine the estimated value. Identical 
modifications have also been made to the proposed revisions in 40 CFR 
98.246(b)(8). These final revisions are included in the Final Table of 
Revisions to this rulemaking (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526).
3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart X Become Effective
    As shown in Table 4 of this preamble and consistent with the 
description of amendments in section I.E.2 of this preamble, all 
amendments to subpart X will be effective on January 1, 2018 as 
proposed and will be reflected starting with RY2017 reports that are 
submitted in 2018. No comments were received on the timing of revisions 
to subpart X.

M. Subpart Y--Petroleum Refineries

    In this action we are finalizing several amendments to 40 CFR part 
98, subpart Y (Petroleum Refineries), to reduce burden for reporters, 
improve data quality, and provide corrections and clarifications. This 
section discusses the substantive revisions to subpart Y. We are 
finalizing as proposed the minor corrections and clarifications to 
subpart Y of Part 98. These minor revisions are summarized in the Final 
Table of Revisions available in the docket for this rulemaking (Docket 
Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526). We are also finalizing as proposed 
confidentiality determinations for new and revised data elements 
resulting from the revisions to subpart Y; see section IV of this 
preamble and the memorandum ``Final Data Category Assignments and 
Confidentiality Determinations for Data Elements in the Proposed 2015 
Revisions'' in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for additional 
information on the final category assignments and confidentiality 
determinations for these data elements.
    The EPA received several comments for subpart Y. Substantive 
comments are addressed in section III.M.2 of this preamble; see the 
document ``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas 
Reporting Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for 
Data Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart Y.
1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart Y
a. Revisions to Subpart Y To Streamline Implementation
    We are finalizing as proposed the amendment to paragraph 40 CFR 
98.253(b) to clarify that pilot gas, which is the gas used to maintain 
a pilot flame at the flare tip, may be, but is not required to be, 
excluded from the quantity of flare gas used to perform GHG emissions 
calculations. As we described in the proposed rule, such emissions are 
relatively small and may be difficult to determine without installation 
of a meter, a burden we did not intend to require. We are making a 
minor change to the proposed revision, as reflected in the Final Table 
of Revisions available in the docket for this rulemaking (Docket Id. 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526). The final revision to subpart Y more clearly 
states that all gas discharges must be included in the flare GHG 
emission calculation with the exception noted above. This minor change 
from proposal does not alter the intent of this revision.
    After consideration of comments received, as discussed in section 
III.M.2 of this preamble, we are finalizing as proposed the amendment 
to 40 CFR 98.256(e) to require that facilities provide a yes/no 
indication as to whether a flare has a flare gas recovery system. As 
discussed in the proposed rule, this requirement will provide critical 
information for characterizing flare emissions, assessing trends, and 
informing policy decisions, while adding only a slight burden to 
reporters. These two revisions affect subpart Y as well as subparts Q 
and X, as described in the preamble to the proposed rule (81 FR 2560).
b. Revisions to Subpart Y To Improve the Quality of the Data Collected 
Under Part 98
    We are finalizing as proposed all of the amendments to the delayed 
coking unit (DCU) GHG emission calculation methodology to require 
facilities to use the steam generation model. As further described in 
the proposed rule preamble, these amendments provide a more accurate 
means of estimating

[[Page 89215]]

methane emissions from DCUs and also align the GHGRP methodology with 
the methodology recently incorporated into the Emission Estimation 
Protocol for Petroleum Refineries, Version 3, by EPA's Office of Air 
Quality Standards and Planning (OAQPS) (the Refinery Protocol \11\).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Emission Estimation Protocol for Petroleum Refineries. 
Version 3. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office 
of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. 
August 2015. See https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/chief/efpac/protocol/ProtocolReport2015.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the proposed amendments for determining the mass of 
coke in the coke drum, the mass of water in the coke drum, and the 
average temperature of the coke bed contents are being finalizing as 
proposed. For the mass of coke in the coke drum, the amendments require 
reporters to determine this quantity based on either (1) Company 
records, or (2) drum dimensions, drum outage (parameters already 
required to be recorded under the current rule) and a new equation 
provided in the rule (Equation Y-18a). For the mass of water in the 
coke drum, the amendments require reporters to determine this quantity 
based on the height of water in the coke drum and the mass of coke in 
the coke drum. For determining the average temperature of the coke bed 
contents, the amendments require reporters to comply with one of two 
methods, either: (1) A method based on the measured overhead 
temperature of the drum, or (2) a method based on the overhead pressure 
using a temperature pressure correlation equation provided in the rule. 
The use of the temperature-pressure correlation will allow reporters to 
use current pressure monitoring and recordkeeping practices to obtain 
the information needed to implement the new methodology. As such, the 
new methodology will not require the installation or use of new 
monitoring systems.
    Additionally, we are finalizing as proposed to allow facilities 
that have DCU vent gas measurements to use these measurements to 
develop a unit-specific methane emissions factor for the DCU. This 
allows both reporters that have previously used the combined Equation 
Y-18/Y-19 method, as well as other reporters, to use the measurement 
data available to provide an improved, site specific emissions 
estimate. If a unit specific methane emissions factor is not available, 
we are finalizing as proposed that reporters must use the default 
methane emissions factor for DCU of 7.9 kg methane per metric ton of 
steam generated.
    With regard to reporting requirements for emissions from DCUs, we 
are finalizing as proposed the amendment that the new methodology be 
used to estimate the emissions for each DCU and that all DCU data 
elements be reported at the unit level. As further discussed in the 
preamble to the proposed rule, this revision provides information 
necessary for us to verify reported data, and streamlines reporting 
requirements for reporters.
    In related revisions, we are finalizing as proposed the revisions 
to 40 CFR 98.253(j) to delete ``CH4 emissions if you elected 
to use the method in paragraph (i)(1) of this section,'' because the 
DCU methodology no longer includes an option to use a combination of 
techniques to determine the CH4 emissions from DCU decoking 
operations. We are also finalizing as proposed the inclusion of ``coke 
produced per cycle'' in the list of quantities of petroleum process 
streams that are determined using company records in 40 CFR 98.254(j), 
and the addition of a requirement that temperature and pressure 
measurements associated with the DCU are to be determined ``using 
process instrumentation operated, maintained, and calibrated according 
to manufacturer's instructions.'' These revisions are included to 
clarify monitoring requirements associated with the new DCU 
methodology. Additionally, we are finalizing as proposed the revisions 
to the recordkeeping requirements in 40 CFR 98.257 associated with the 
DCU to harmonize the recordkeeping requirements with the new DCU 
methodology equations.
    We are finalizing as proposed amendments to revise 40 CFR 
98.253(h)(1) to clarify that reporters with ``asphalt blowing 
operations controlled either by vapor scrubbing or by another non-
combustion control device'' must use Equations Y-14 and Y-15 to 
calculate their GHG emissions. Lastly, we are also finalizing as 
proposed revisions to 40 CFR 98.253(h)(2) to clarify that reporters 
with ``asphalt blowing operations controlled by either a thermal 
oxidizer, a flare, or other vapor combustion control device'' must use 
Equations Y-16a/Y-16b and Y-17 to calculate their GHG emissions. These 
amendments will yield more accurate emissions values as reporters will 
now be required to use the most appropriate equations for ``other'' 
control systems used for asphalt blowing operations.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to the proposed amendments to subpart Y. See the document 
``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for Data 
Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. No. 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart Y.
    Comment: One commenter objected to the amendments to 40 CFR 
98.256(e)(3) and (6), stating that the proposed amendments are 
redundant and duplicative. The commenter stated that the EPA already 
has this information under 40 CFR part 60, subpart Ja--Standards of 
Performance for Petroleum Refineries for Which Construction, 
Reconstruction, or Modification Commenced After May 14, 2007 
(henceforth referred to as NSPS Ja) and that they do not support 
reporting this information under the GHGRP. The commenter also noted 
that, due to the special modification provisions set forth in 40 CFR 
60.100a(c), nearly all refinery flares with few exceptions fall under 
NSPS Ja. The commenter stated that the NSPS Ja requirements at 40 CFR 
60.103a(a) require carbon content, molecular weight and annual mass of 
flare gas combusted, and an indication of whether or not each flare is 
serviced by a flare gas recovery system to be documented in the flare 
management plan and submitted to the EPA. The commenter stated that the 
EPA does not need to have the same information submitted to it under 
two separate rules because such duplicative reporting is wasteful and 
unnecessary.
    Response: The proposed revisions in 40 CFR 98.256(e)(6) are 
modifications to existing reporting requirements to provide more direct 
reporting requirements for reporters using mass flow meters, so that 
those reporters would no longer need to separately determine the 
molecular weight of the gas and volumetric flow rate and instead must 
report only the measured mass flow rate. This amendment reduces GHGRP 
reporting burden for reporters that use mass flow meters. This 
information, which is needed for verification of the reported 
emissions, is not available in the NSPS Ja flare management plans so 
reporting this information is not duplicative. We are therefore 
finalizing the amendments to 40 CFR 98.256(e)(6) related to reporting 
the carbon content of flare gas, and

[[Page 89216]]

either the volume and molecular weight of that gas or the mass of that 
gas, as proposed.
    Regarding the proposed revision to 40 CFR 98.256(e)(3), while the 
presence of a flare gas recovery system could be gleaned from flare 
management plans for flares subject to the NSPS Ja requirements, not 
every flare required to report under the GHGRP is subject to the NSPS 
Ja requirements. We have received approximately 170 flare management 
plans covering approximately 340 flares under NSPS Ja; however, there 
were 495 flares at refineries included in facilities' GHGRP reports in 
2014. Therefore, adding the proposed reporting requirement to the GHGRP 
will cover many additional flares where it is unknown to us whether a 
flare gas recovery system is in place. Additionally, the proposed 
revision will allow EPA to gather information on flare gas recovery 
systems at petrochemical production and iron and steel production 
facilities. Part 98 requires facilities in these industries to use the 
methodology specified in subpart Y for flares. Facilities in these 
industries are not subject to NSPS Ja.
    For the subset of flares subject to NSPS Ja, it would be time 
consuming for us to compile the information regarding the presence of a 
flare gas recovery system from submitted flare management plans and 
update this information annually. The amount of time required by the 
GHGRP reporter to make this indication would be very low. For most 
flares, the presence of a flare gas recovery system would not change 
annually (exceptions include cases where a flare gas recovery system 
was newly installed). Potentially, once this data element is initially 
reported in RY2018, the EPA may be able to develop a way to ``carry 
over'' the reported information from a facility's RY2018 report and 
pre-populate this information in each facility's subsequent reports. If 
the carry-over process is implemented, the reporter would only need to 
enter the information once (for RY2018) and make changes to this data 
element in future reporting years only when the presence of the flare 
gas recovery system changed. This potential future reporting process 
should reduce burden even further, if implemented. Additionally, having 
this information reported within the GHGRP data system will allow the 
EPA to publish and review the information alongside the rest of the 
reported data related to flares, which greatly improves the usability 
of the information by allowing for streamlined comparison of the GHGRP 
reported emissions for flares with and without flare gas recovery 
systems to better gauge the effectiveness of these systems.
    For the reasons outlined above, after full consideration of this 
comment we are finalizing revisions to 40 CFR 98.256(e)(3) and (6) as 
proposed.
    Comment: Several commenters provided comments opposing the proposed 
steam generation model method for calculating methane emissions from 
DCUs on several grounds. One commenter stated that the proposed method 
will significantly overstate the amount of steam that is generated upon 
opening the coke drum to the atmosphere and thus overstate the methane 
emissions because of the following incorrect assumptions: (1) There is 
a uniform temperature throughout the entire coke bed and the quench 
water at the time the vent is started; (2) the amount of heat evolved 
is derived from cooling the entire mass of coke and quench water from 
that initial uniform temperature to 212 [deg]F; (3) 10 percent of the 
heat removed from the coke bed and quench water is dissipated through 
the coke drum and overhead metal and the balance of the heat removed 
from the coke bed (90 percent) goes into steam generation; and (4) 100 
percent of the water in the coke drum at the time of venting is at its 
bubble point (i.e., all the heat evolved goes toward affecting 
evaporation and none of it is used in heating the water to the boiling 
point).
    The commenter further stated that these assumptions are not 
supported by the experience of the commenters or the available data. 
Commenters note that coker process experts report significant 
temperature gradients through the coke mass and the quench water 
throughout the drum. The commenters assert that at the time a coke drum 
is opened to the atmosphere the water and coke in the bottom of the 
drum is at approximately the temperature of the incoming quench water 
(much less than 212 [deg]F). Therefore, the commenter states, the 
required assumption that the entire mass of coke and quench water is at 
212 [deg]F, regardless of the actual temperature readings, overstates 
the heat in the drum and thus the heat generated significantly. 
Commenters provided data showing that, for the five DCUs presented, the 
bottom of the drums, as reflected in the initial drain water 
temperature, was at temperatures below 150 [deg]F. Furthermore, 
commenters noted that the vast majority of quench water drained from 
these units was below 212 [deg]F, demonstrating that most of the quench 
water in the drums when they were opened to the atmosphere was not at 
its bubble (boiling) point. Commenters assert that this is typical for 
DCUs in general.
    Commenters further described the cooling process noting that the 
quench water (100 to 130 [deg]F) continuously enters from the bottom of 
the coke drum and, as the coke in the drum cools, the quench water 
accumulates in the lower coke bed, being of higher density than the 
water above, some of which is at its bubble point. According to the 
commenters, the amount of sub-cooled water in the coke drum and its 
temperature prior to atmospheric venting is dependent on a number of 
factors, but some cokers completely cool their bed, such that 99 
percent of the water is sub-cooled. According to the commenter, the 
typical range is from 50 percent to 99 percent subcooling. Thus, the 
commenters state that at best (the 50 percent case) the proposed 
equations will overstate steam and methane generation by 100 percent 
and in most cases will overstate it by even more.
    Response: After consideration of this comment, for the reasons 
stated in this preamble, the proposed rule preamble, and in this 
docket, we are finalizing the steam generation model method for 
calculating methane emissions from DCUs as proposed.
    First, with respect to the comment that we have assumed that there 
is a uniform temperature throughout the entire coke bed when first 
opening the coke bed to the atmosphere, we do not agree that the 
commenter's statement is fully accurate, as our position is that the 
methodology acknowledges and accounts for the existence of a 
temperature gradient. While the proposed method does calculate an 
average bed temperature for the methane emissions calculation, this 
calculation acknowledges that there is a temperature gradient by using 
both the temperature at the top of the coke bed (or overhead line 
temperature) and at the bottom of the coke bed to determine the average 
temperature of the coke bed.
    Second, regarding the commenter's questioning of the methodology's 
assumption that the entire mass of coke and quench water is above 212 
[deg]F at the time a coke drum is opened to the atmosphere, we note 
that the methodology is designed to account for emissions from the 
entire decoking process (which includes venting, water draining, drum 
deheading, and coke cutting) while reducing burden on reporters. To 
reduce burden, rather than requiring reporters to use separate 
equations to calculate emissions from each part of the process listed 
above, the methodology estimates total emissions from these processes 
based on steam generation at the time of venting to the

[[Page 89217]]

atmosphere. The methodology relies on certain assumptions in order to 
calculate total emissions that are reasonable estimates. We do 
acknowledge that it is physically possible for the average temperature 
of the coke bed to be at or below 212 [deg]F when opened to the 
atmosphere, but even if the average temperature of the coke bed were 
beneath 212 [deg]F and minimal amounts of steam were generated, methane 
emissions still occur for multiple reasons, which the methodology is 
designed to also account for. To name a couple of examples, pockets of 
gas trapped within the coke bed may not be released until the coke is 
cut from the drum, or emissions may still occur from the drain water. 
Using a temperature at or below 212 [deg]F within this methodology 
would not account for these emissions accurately. If the methodology 
were changed to allow for temperatures at or below 212 [deg]F to be 
used, this methodology could not accurately represent emissions from 
the entire intended process, requiring that additional equations would 
need to be added to the rule to account for emissions that occur during 
other parts of the decoking process. While we have considered this 
alternative, we have determined that this methodology provides a 
reasonable estimation of emissions from the process and is less 
burdensome. Therefore, in order to properly account for all decoking 
process emissions using the methodology being finalized, 
Tinitial in equation Y-18e must be greater than 212 [deg]F, 
regardless of the venting temperature or pressure, to account for 
methane emissions that are not directly associated with steam 
formation.
    Third, we maintain that a 10 percent convective heat loss is an 
appropriate assumption (for more detailed reasoning, please see the 
Refinery Protocol's Response to Comments document available in that 
action's docket). The commenter provided no evidence to suggest 
otherwise. Due to the large size of the vessel, the volume of the 
vessel is much larger than the surface area and the convective heat 
loss is expected to be only a small portion of the evaporative heat 
loss over the duration of the venting and draining process.
    Fourth, with respect to the assumption that 100 percent of the 
water in the coke drum at the time of venting is at its bubble point 
(i.e., all the heat evolved goes toward affecting evaporation and none 
of it is used in heating the water to the boiling point), we maintain 
the reasoning behind these assumptions for the key reasons we discussed 
above. Specifically, the model is designed to estimate emissions from 
the entire decoking process, so a minimum average bed temperature of 
greater than 212 [deg]F is necessary and appropriate to account for any 
emissions from the coke cutting process and drain water. We also note 
that the heat capacity of the coke and water (per degree temperature 
change) is about 100 times the heat of vaporization for a given mass of 
water. As such, if some of the water had to be raised to the bubble 
point first, this ``heat sink'' typically has only a small impact on 
the quantity of steam generated and hence the calculated emissions.
    The commenter offered limited data on drum water temperatures from 
one company to suggest that the assumptions cited are inaccurate. 
First, these data do not appear to be representative of DCU operations 
nationwide. Forty percent of the DCU included in this company's data 
use water overflow technique. Based on information collected during the 
development of the December 1, 2015, amendments to 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart CC (80 FR 75178), which included new standards for DCU at 
petroleum refineries, this water overflow technique is estimated to be 
used at about 4 percent of operating DCU (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2010-0682, Item Numbers -0061 through -0069, -0085, -0188, -0202, -
0203, -0216, -0219, -0719, and -0747). This method allows the operator 
to use an unlimited amount of water and continually overflow the coke 
drum with water to reach a target cooling temperature. Thus, these 
units are expected to be more effectively cooled than units commonly 
used in the industry. To calculate methane emissions with the proposed 
method, these DCU would generally use the minimum default temperatures. 
Therefore, the emissions calculated with the proposed method would 
appropriately be lower for DCU with water overflow than the industry 
average, but would still account for methane emissions that occur from 
the overflow water and the coke cutting phase.
    Second, the drain water temperature, particularly at the start of 
draining, is not necessarily representative of the average coke bed 
temperature. Cooling water is added at the base of the DCU, below the 
bottom of the coke bed. Thus, the initial temperature of the drain 
water may represent water that has never contacted the coke bed. 
Additionally, the primary flow of water at the base of the coke bed 
will be through specific channels in the coke bed. In fact, even within 
the coke bed, the water will generally flow through specific channels. 
As such, there can be pockets of hot coke within the coke bed even 
though the water in the channels and the coke immediately surrounding 
these channels are at a much lower temperature. Therefore, the drain 
water temperature may not provide an accurate assessment of the average 
coke bed temperature.
    Finally, the drain water temperature observed will be dependent on 
the lag time between when venting begins and draining begins. 
Certainly, if the pressure of the system is 12 pounds per square inch 
gauge (psig) at the start of the venting cycle, there must be 
significant steam generation (which is what causes the elevated 
pressure) and therefore, a portion of the coke bed must be well over 
212 [deg]F. If the water is drained very soon after initiation of 
atmospheric venting, the drain water profile is expected to rise well 
above 212 [deg]F. However, if draining is delayed for an hour or so, 
the continued generation of steam at the top of the coke bed would help 
to cool the top of the coke bed. Thus, if one waits to drain long 
enough the evaporative heat loss effect would cool the bed (as 
predicted by the heat balance model) and the drain water temperature 
would not exceed 212 [deg]F.
    We maintain that the proposed model with the assumptions described 
above is the most accurate available for estimating methane emissions 
from the DCU considering the releases that can occur during all phases 
of the decoking operations. Table 1 in the technical memorandum 
``Revised Emission Methodology for Delayed Coking Units'' (Docket Id. 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526-006), shows that the emissions predicted using 
the proposed steam generation model compares well with measured 
emissions from the DCU steam vent (which does not consider other 
emissions from draining, deheading, or coke cutting), particularly for 
DCU that did not begin draining soon after initiating venting. After 
consideration of this comment, for the reasons stated in this preamble, 
the proposed rule preamble, and in this docket, we are finalizing as 
proposed.
    Comment: One commenter opposed the revision to the emissions 
calculations for DCUs for the following reasons: (1) Poor accuracy; and 
(2) that EPA cannot ``align'' Part 98 with the Refinery Protocol unless 
the change in methodology is voluntary. With regard to poor accuracy, 
the commenter described how the EPA ranks calculation methods in the 
order of accuracy, ``Method 1'' through ``Method 5,'' with Method 1 
being the most preferred/accurate. The commenter

[[Page 89218]]

states that the methodology EPA is proposing is ranked as ``Method \3/
4\,'' indicating a poor level of accuracy. Consequently, the proposal 
does not appear to improve or further the accuracy of the inventory. 
The commenter asserts that the EPA has failed to adequately explain the 
relative accuracy between the existing and proposed methods in 
quantitative terms, leading to the conclusion that one poor method is 
being replaced for another. The commenter further states that given 
that most methane emissions are controlled from DCUs in combustion 
devices meeting 98 percent Destruction and Removal Efficiency (DRE), 
this change in methodology will not result in a meaningful improvement 
in the overall accuracy of the inventory.
    With regard to the need to make this change voluntary, the 
commenter describes that during the development of Version 3 of the 
Refinery Protocol it was made clear that the use of the factors and 
methods therein were voluntary, not mandatory. According to the 
commenter, the EPA Technology Transfer Network Web page clearly states, 
``We are not requiring the use of the Refinery Protocol, just as we do 
not require the use of AP-42. It is simply another tool for use in 
estimating emissions when site-specific test data do not exist or are 
not available'' and this was understood between both OAQPS and the 
refining sector. Therefore, the commenter considers the proposed 
revisions to the federal GHG inventory rule that would require the use 
of these calculation methodologies, as a circumvention of the function 
and purpose of the Refinery Protocol. The commenter finds that it is 
inappropriate to develop calculation methods with the understanding 
that their use is optional, only to then make their use mandatory in 
rulemaking under the guises of ``alignment'' between the two. The 
commenter states that, should EPA make the use of the Refinery Protocol 
methodology in Part 98 an option, this would be considered true 
alignment between inventory and Refinery Protocol and an acceptable 
solution to the commenter.
    Response: The Refinery Protocol ranks different types of 
methodologies that can be used to quantify emissions in terms of their 
relative accuracy to provide an order of preference for which inventory 
emission estimates should be developed based on the information 
available to the emissions inventory compilers. Methodology Rank 1 
(highest rank) is reserved for direct continuous emission monitoring of 
the emissions. Methodology Rank 2 is similar, but allows, for example, 
direct concentration measurements and flow rates estimated by F-
factors. As noted in the Refinery Protocol, Methodology Ranks 1 and 2 
are not applicable for DCU decoking operation emissions because of the 
nature of the vent (high steam content) and varied locations that 
emissions can be released. Thus, for DCU, Methodology Rank \3/4\ is the 
best, most accurate method available.
    During development of the Refinery Protocol, we determined that the 
newer methodology is a more accurate way to determine the total 
emissions from DCU than the existing methodology in the rule based on 
comparisons between the emissions calculated using each methodology and 
DCU source test measurement of the decoking venting step. Table 1 in 
the technical memorandum ``Revised Emission Methodology for Delayed 
Coking Units'' (Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526-006) clearly 
compares the emissions predicted using the old ``depressuring model'' 
(Equation Y-18) with emissions predicted using the proposed steam 
generation model, as well as emissions measured from the DCU steam 
vent. We expect most refineries will use the pressure correlation 
alternative provided in the rule we are finalizing as proposed, and 
this method provided an estimate of within a factor of 1.4 of the 
measured emissions and would yield a result even closer to the measured 
emissions if other decoking operation emissions were included. The 
depressuring model, on the other hand, resulted in emissions that were 
a factor of 10 lower than the measured emissions and would 
underestimate emissions by an even larger amount if other decoking 
operation emissions were included in the measurements. The data we have 
provided in the docket record clearly demonstrate that the proposed 
steam generation model is more accurate than the old depressuring 
model.
    We agree that prior to the decoking process, there is an initial 
depressurization, steaming, and cooling phase where the emissions are 
required to be routed to a closed vent system and either recovered as 
product or controlled via a flare or similar device. During this phase, 
there are no emissions when the vapors are recovered as product and 
flared emissions are accounted for by the flare methodology in 40 CFR 
98.253(b). While the emissions from the initial cooling cycle may be 
controlled, they are not accounted for in the DCU methodology, which 
only considers emissions that occur in the decoking steps after this 
initial, controlled cooling phase. As such, the commenter's suggestion 
that most methane emissions are controlled from DCUs in combustion 
devices meeting 98 percent DRE, is incomplete.
    After this initial cooling period, the coke drum gases are no 
longer routed to the closed vent system and are instead diverted to the 
atmosphere. This uncontrolled, atmospheric venting is the start of the 
decoking operations and the DCU emissions estimated for the GHGRP in 
accordance with 40 CFR 98.253(i) include only these direct atmospheric 
emissions. Therefore, we disagree with commenter's statement that the 
proposed methodology's emission estimates are overstated, since 
emissions that occur from the DCU while the emissions are being vented 
to controls (i.e., during the initial cooling cycle) are not included 
at all in the DCU emissions methodology in 40 CFR 98.253(i).
    We disagree with the commenter that the new DCU calculation 
methodology must be voluntary. Generally, we want facilities to use the 
most accurate method possible, rather than providing several 
methodologies of varying accuracies that facilities can voluntarily 
choose between, and we desire consistent methods be used where 
practical to allow for reported emissions to be compared on a level 
playing field across facilities. In certain cases where it may appear 
that we provide alternative methodologies for facilities to voluntarily 
select from (such as the alternatives provided for flares), these 
methodologies provide options on the basis of the monitoring equipment 
available, and so are not truly optional but rather prescribed based 
upon the existing monitoring equipment. In the example of methodologies 
for flares, if carbon content is measured, the reporter must use 
Equation Y-1A or Y-1B in 40 CFR 98.253(b)(1)(ii)(A); they cannot elect 
to use Equation Y-2 in 40 CFR 98.253(b)(1)(ii)(B) or Y-3 in 40 CFR 
98.253(b)(1)(ii)(C). Where we do allow methods to be selected 
voluntarily, as in the case of Equations Y-1A and Y-1B, we do so 
because the methods yield very consistent results (within 0.1 percent 
for typical range of CO2 concentrations in flare gas).
    This is not the case when comparing the old DCU methodology with 
the new DCU methodology. The old DCU methodology was found to 
underestimate actual CH4 emissions from the DCU by a factor 
of 10, which is much less accurate than the new methodology, meaning 
that we do not find that the emissions calculated by the two methods 
are consistent enough for us to allow the methods to be used 
interchangeably (as we did in the case

[[Page 89219]]

of Equation Y-1A and Y-1B in 40 CFR98.253(b)(1)(ii)(A)). Furthermore, 
in the finalized methodology for DCU, we have provided reporters with 
options to use either pressure monitoring data or overhead temperature 
data to determine the average initial bed temperature. We specifically 
provided the pressure monitoring alternative because the pressure of 
the vessel prior to venting was already a monitoring requirement. Since 
no new monitoring requirements are necessary to begin use of the 
methodology being finalized, to ensure methods are employed 
consistently across all reporters, and based on the method's proven 
ability to better predict the emissions measured from these sources, we 
are finalizing this method as mandatory for all reporters, as proposed.
    Comment: One commenter noted that DCU emissions are highly 
dependent on coker operating parameters, and EPA should allow the use 
of site-specific coking unit emissions models and estimation methods. 
The commenter describes that some DCU have new designs and operational 
procedures that are intended to lower emissions, and the generic 
calculation methodology may substantially overestimate emissions. The 
commenter further states that in some jurisdictions, emission 
measurements on delayed coker vents are required on a three-year basis. 
The commenter asserts that facilities that have such measurements 
should have the option of using them for calculating methane emissions 
as part of subpart Y reporting, and that if a facility is using site-
specific calculations and measurement data for reporting of coker vent 
emissions, it may need to estimate emissions from draining if the drain 
water temperature is above 212 [deg]F for some portion of the draining 
period. The commenter offered a proposed methodology (outlined below) 
and asserted that emissions from draining when drain water temperatures 
are below 212 [deg]F are negligible, as are emissions from coke 
cutting, because methane has a very low solubility in water. The 
commenter stated that one company indicated that approximately 0.2 
percent of methane would be expected to partition into the aqueous 
phase. As a result, the commenter says the potential methane emissions 
in DCU drain water would be expected to be low compared to those from 
the venting part of the unit operational cycle.
    The commenter suggested that emissions from steam flashing during 
draining could be estimated based on evaluation of coke drum drain 
temperature during the entire drain period. According to the commenter, 
if drain water temperatures are never above 212 [deg]F, there would be 
no attendant methane emissions added to those from the vent, since 
there should be negligible methane dissolved in water that has already 
flashed and cooled. The commenter further states that if drain 
temperatures rise above 212 [deg]F, the mass of steam would be 
calculated based on the following modified version of Equation Y-18e:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE16.000

Where:

fHotDrain = Fraction of time during drain that drain water is >212 
[deg]F (for example, if drain time was 60 minutes and temperature 
was above 212 [deg]F during the last 15 minutes of draining, then 
fHotDrain = 15/60 = 0.25).
THotDrain = The minute-averaged temperature of the water when it is 
>2 12 [deg]F (for example, if drain temperatures were above 212 
[deg]F during the last 15 minutes of draining, then THotDrain = (213 
+ 216 + 220 + 222 + 224 + 230 + 232 + 234 + 236 + 238 + 240 + 240 + 
240 + 240 + 240)/15 = 229 [deg]F).

    Per the commenter, methane emissions from draining would then be 
determined by using the conservative assumption that the methane 
concentration in the drain steam is the same as the vent steam.
    The commenter also asserted that the drilling process should have 
negligible emissions unless there is ongoing chemical reaction, 
formation of coke, or tail gas and liquid hydrocarbons due to 
uncompleted reaction when feeding the coke drum. According to the 
commenter, drilling emissions cannot be directly measured but can be 
correlated to hot spots, coke drum blowbacks, coke dust incidents, and 
odors. Further the commenter states that because these conditions are 
so undesirable from a safety and community perspective, these 
occurrences have been minimized and thus it is reasonable to assume the 
coke cutting contribution to overall coker emissions is quite small. 
The commenter then asserts that isolated hot spots in the coke bed, as 
indicated by steam generation during coke cutting, if they occur at 
all, are less than 0.1 percent of the coke bed volume. According to the 
commenter, the amount of methane released is well within the accuracy 
of the proposed calculations and the associated large assumptions, and 
can be ignored.
    Response: After careful consideration of this comment, we are 
finalizing the methodology as proposed. We agree that the DCU decoking 
emissions are unit-specific and the new methodology includes a variety 
of unit-specific inputs including the mass of water in the drum, the 
mass of coke in the drum, and the drum overhead temperature or 
pressure. New unit designs that allow for more effectively cooling of 
the coke bed will operate with lower overhead temperatures and will 
show lower emissions than units that cannot achieve these overhead 
temperatures.
    As noted in the response to comment above, the methodology we are 
finalizing is intended to estimate releases from all phases of the 
decoking process. We agree the methane emissions from the coke-cutting 
process will not necessarily be related to steam generation, so, in 
order to account for these emissions in our methodology, we 
intentionally do not allow temperature inputs that would estimate no 
(or negative) emissions from the DCU even if the overhead temperature 
is below 212 [deg]F.
    In our methodology, we allow facilities that have vent measurement 
data to develop their own site-specific emissions factor for methane 
emissions (in kg CH4 per metric ton of steam emitted in the 
vent line). As such, facilities can use measurement data when available 
to further refine their DCU emissions.
    We compared the commenter's suggested methodology to our 
methodology, which includes the use of a site-specific emission factor 
along with the proposed steam generation quantity. We found our method 
to be a more appropriate means by which to incorporate site-specific 
measurement data for the following reasons. First, the vent emissions 
measured are highly dependent on the time period between initiation of 
venting and draining. A facility can drain immediately when measuring 
emissions from the vent to minimize the emissions released via the 
vent. However, it may be more common practice to delay draining for a 
longer

[[Page 89220]]

period after venting during routine operations. In this event, using 
the measured venting emissions from the source test and then estimating 
the drain emissions as suggested by the commenter could significantly 
underestimate the DCU emissions from these steps. Second, the 
commenter's suggested methodology does not consider releases that can 
occur during drum deheading and coke cutting, but rather assumes these 
to be negligible. DIAL measurement studies of DCU emissions \12\ 
measured elevated emissions from the drainage area during the coke 
cutting process. While emissions during the coke cutting step may not 
be proportional to steam generation, we disagree that these emissions 
should be assumed to be zero, and instead maintain that a robust 
methodology must account for these emissions. Thus, the commenter's 
suggested methodology could misrepresent measured emissions based on 
the timing of draining, and is too limited in scope for our intended 
purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Refinery Demonstration of Optical Technologies for 
Measurement of Fugitive Emissions and for Leak Detection (Roy 
McArthur, Environment Canada, and Allan Chambers and Mel Strosher, 
Carbon and Energy Management, March 31, 2006); and Measurement and 
Analysis of Benzene and VOC Emissions in the Houston Ship Channel 
Area and Selected Surrounding Major Stationary Sources Using DIAL 
(Differential Absorption Light Detection and Ranging) Technology to 
Support Ambient HAP Concentrations Reductions in the Community 
(Loren Raun & Dan W. Hoyt, Bur. Pollution Control & Prevention, City 
of Houston, 2011), available in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart Y Become Effective
    As shown in Table 5 of this preamble and consistent with the 
description of amendments in section I.E.3 of this preamble, all 
amendments to subpart Y will be effective on January 1, 2019 as 
proposed and will be reflected starting with RY2018 reports that are 
submitted in 2019. No comments were received on the timing of revisions 
to subpart Y.

N. Subpart Z--Phosphoric Acid Production

    In this action, we are finalizing amendments to subpart Z of Part 
98 (Phosphoric Acid Production). This section discusses all the 
amendments to subpart Z. We are also finalizing as proposed 
confidentiality determinations for new data elements resulting from the 
revisions to subpart Z; see section IV of this preamble and the 
memorandum ``Final Data Category Assignments and Confidentiality 
Determinations for Data Elements in the Proposed 2015 Revisions'' in 
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for additional information on the 
final category assignments and confidentiality determinations for these 
data elements.
    The EPA received only supportive comments for subpart Z; therefore, 
there are no changes from proposal to the final rule based on these 
comments. See the document ``Summary of Public Comments and Responses 
for Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality 
Determinations for Data Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Rule'' in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of 
all comments and responses related to subpart Z.
    As proposed, we are revising 40 CFR 98.266(f)(3) to require that 
the annual report must include the annual phosphoric acid production 
capacity (tons) for each wet-process phosphoric acid line, rather than 
the annual permitted phosphoric acid production capacity, for the 
reasons discussed in the proposed rule (81 FR 2561). We are removing 
the word ``permitted'' from the requirement to report the process-level 
production capacity, noting that not all facilities have a permitted 
production capacity at the process level or produce to the permitted 
capacity. We are also clarifying, as proposed, the units of measurement 
for this reporting requirement. The pre-existing text for 40 CFR 
98.266(f)(3) requires the reporting of ``annual phosphoric acid 
permitted production capacity (tons) for each wet-process phosphoric 
acid process line (metric tons).'' In this action, we are removing the 
phrase ``(metric tons)'' from this text to clarify that the unit of 
measurement is ``tons'' and not ``metric tons.''
    As shown in Table 4 of this preamble and consistent with the 
description of amendments in section I.E.2 of this preamble, all 
amendments to subpart Z will be effective on January 1, 2018 as 
proposed and will be reflected starting with RY2017 reports that are 
submitted in 2018. No comments were received on the timing of revisions 
to subpart Z.

O. Subpart AA--Pulp and Paper Manufacturing

    In this action, we are finalizing three amendments and 
clarifications to subpart AA of Part 98 (Pulp and Paper Manufacturing) 
as proposed. This section discusses all of the final revisions to 
subpart AA. The EPA received only minor comments for subpart AA and 
there are no changes from proposal to the final rule based on these 
comments. See the document ``Summary of Public Comments and Responses 
for Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality 
Determinations for Data Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Rule'' in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of 
all comments and responses related to subpart AA.
    We are finalizing as proposed all amendments to subpart AA for the 
reasons described in the preamble to the proposed rule (81 FR 2562). 
First, we are finalizing as proposed amendments to 40 CFR 98.273(a)(1), 
(b)(1), and (c)(1), which refer to the subpart C calculation 
methodologies for CO2 emissions from combustion of fossil 
fuel, to clarify that Tier 4 CEMS are not used to report emissions 
under subpart AA. Second, we are finalizing as proposed the revision of 
40 CFR 98.275(b) to allow use of the daily mass of spent liquor solids 
fired reported under 40 CFR 63.866(c)(1) as an alternative to using 
maximum values for missing spent liquor solids measurements. Lastly, we 
are finalizing as proposed the clarifications in Table AA-2 to subpart 
AA to more clearly distinguish between kraft rotary lime kilns and 
calciners.
    As shown in Table 4 of this preamble and consistent with the 
description of amendments in section I.E.2 of this preamble, all 
amendments to subpart AA will be effective on January 1, 2018 as 
proposed and will be reflected starting with RY2017 reports that are 
submitted in 2018. No comments were received on the timing of revisions 
to subpart AA.

P. Subpart CC--Soda Ash Manufacturing

    In this action, we are finalizing one minor correction to subpart 
CC of Part 98 (Soda Ash Manufacturing). This section discusses the 
substantive revisions that were proposed for subpart CC, but that the 
EPA is not finalizing. The minor correction that the EPA is finalizing 
is summarized in the Final Table of Revisions available in the docket 
for this rulemaking (Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526).
    The EPA received several comments for subpart CC. Substantive 
comments are addressed in section III.P.2 of this preamble; see the 
document ``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas 
Reporting Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for 
Data Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart CC.

[[Page 89221]]

1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart CC
    No substantive amendments to subpart CC are being finalized for 
this rulemaking. In response to comments and based on updated analysis 
as described in section III.P.2 of this preamble, the EPA is not 
finalizing the two proposed amendments to revise 40 CFR 98.296(a) and 
(b) that would have required reporting of the facility-level annual 
consumption of trona or liquid alkaline feedstock.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses on Subpart CC
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to the proposed amendments to subpart CC. See the document 
``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for Data 
Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. No 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart CC.
    Comment: Several commenters do not support the EPA's proposed 
revision related to facility-level feedstock reporting under subpart 
CC, stating that the EPA did not provide sufficient justification for 
the proposed revisions. The commenters cite the preamble to the 
proposed rule, saying that the EPA asserts that these data elements are 
already required for facilities that use CEMS. However, the commenters 
state there are a very limited number of soda ash manufacturers and 
that very few of the manufacturing lines monitor emissions using CEMS. 
Therefore, the commenters object to the significant additional 
recordkeeping and reporting efforts that would be posed by these 
amendments, particularly because the rule already requires reporting of 
outputs of both soda ash produced and GHG emitted, in their view wholly 
fulfilling the statutory requirements for the program. The commenters 
cite the EPA's own U.S. GHG Inventory report to question the 
justification that the reporting of trona inputs and outputs would 
``improve the quality of the US GHG Inventory,'' stating that the EPA 
refers to the relatively low uncertainty levels in the emission 
estimates for soda ash manufacturing. The commenters further cite the 
EPA's report, which says that the primary source of uncertainty in this 
sector occurs downstream from the manufacturing sites that would be 
affected by this rulemaking. The commenters conclude that the proposed 
revisions would therefore not improve the inventory estimates in any 
material way and do not warrant the additional regulatory burden.
    Response: At this time, the EPA is not finalizing the proposal to 
require reporting of annual consumption of trona or liquid alkaline 
feedstock at the facility level, but may do so in the future. The EPA 
recognizes that a similar data element was removed in the Final Inputs 
rule and is currently reported only by facilities monitoring emissions 
via CEMS (79 FR 63750, October 24, 2014).\13\ The proposed new data 
element is similar, but not identical to the one removed from 40 CFR 
98.296(b)(5) in the Final Inputs rule. The proposed new data element 
would have required reporting of annual consumption of trona or liquid 
alkaline feedstock at the facility level, whereas the data element 
removed in the Final Inputs rule required reporting of monthly 
consumption. As proposed, this new data element would have been treated 
as CBI. In preparing to finalize this rulemaking, the EPA has conducted 
an updated assessment on use of this proposed information and 
determined that the information very likely will not meet the EPA's 
criteria for aggregation and publication of CBI information contained 
in Federal Register Notification-9911-98-OAR.\14\ Inability to 
aggregate and publish this information presents a significant barrier 
to its use for publishing analyses to inform future GHG policies and 
programs, such as emission intensities for this industry, and for 
integration into the U.S. GHG Inventory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Refer to Table 1 in the memorandum ``Data Elements Deferred 
to March 31, 2015: Final List of `Inputs to Equations' Data Elements 
Not To Be Reported,'' September 2014 (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2010-0929).
    \14\ See https://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/confidential-business-information-ghg-reporting#CBI Data Aggregation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although the EPA is not finalizing these proposed data elements at 
this time, the Agency disagrees with commenters on the value of these 
data to enhance estimates for the U.S. GHG Inventory. As commenters 
note, the current method applied in the U.S. GHG Inventory 
overestimates emissions from Soda Ash Production, so it does not 
accurately reflect annual national emissions from this industry. The 
EPA currently estimates CO2 process emissions from soda ash 
production using a tier 1 approach, based on application of default 
emission factors provided in the 2006 IPCC Guidelines to estimated 
national trona consumption. National consumption of trona is 
approximated in the U.S. GHG Inventory based on national trona 
production presented in voluntary surveys conducted by USGS. As noted 
in the Overview Chapter of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National GHG 
Inventories, ``accuracy and precision should, in general, improve from 
tier 1 to tier 3'' (p.8). The tier 3 methods in the 2006 IPCC 
Guidelines recommend estimating emissions by aggregating plant-level 
information per Volume 3, Chapter 3.3: Natural Soda Ash Production as 
noted in the preamble to this proposed rule. Further, inclusion of the 
emission factors derived from emissions and trona ore consumption would 
account for fractional purity of trona ore and reflect an improvement 
from IPCC defaults. Facilities subject to subpart CC must measure the 
inorganic carbon contents of trona inputs and/or soda ash outputs on a 
monthly basis and apply this factor to estimate their emissions. 
Requiring reporting of trona consumption, in addition to the inorganic 
carbon contents of trona inputs and/or soda ash outputs, would allow 
tier 3 methods aggregating plant-level data to be used in preparing the 
U.S. GHG Inventory emissions estimates. However, as noted above, use of 
GHGRP information in the U.S. GHG Inventory also necessitates 
transparent presentation of underlying activity data (e.g., national 
production based on facility level data), emission factors (e.g., 
derived from production and emissions), in addition to aggregated 
emissions, which would not be feasible if the information was 
determined to be CBI.
3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart CC Become Effective
    As shown in Table 4 of this preamble and consistent with the 
description of amendments in section I.E.2 of this preamble, the one 
remaining minor amendment to subpart CC will be effective on January 1, 
2018 as proposed and will be reflected starting with RY2017 reports 
that are submitted in 2018. No comments were received on the timing of 
revisions to subpart CC.

Q. Subpart DD--Use of Electric Transmission and Distribution Equipment

    In this action, the EPA is finalizing several amendments to 40 CFR 
part 98, subpart DD (Use of Electric Transmission and Distribution 
Equipment), to improve the quality and usefulness of the data received 
by the GHGRP. This section discusses all of the final revisions to 
subpart DD. We are also finalizing confidentiality determinations for 
new data elements resulting from these revisions to subpart DD; see 
section IV of this preamble and

[[Page 89222]]

the memorandum ``Final Data Category Assignments and Confidentiality 
Determinations for Data Elements in the Final 2015 Revisions'' in 
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for additional information on the 
final category assignments and confidentiality determinations for these 
data elements.
    The EPA received several comments for subpart DD. Substantive 
comments are addressed in section III.Q.2 of this preamble; see the 
document ``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas 
Reporting Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for 
Data Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart DD.
1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart DD
    We are finalizing, as proposed, the addition of a data element to 
require the reporter to provide the name of the U.S. state, states, or 
territory in which the electric power system lies. We are not 
finalizing the proposed requirement to report the total miles of 
transmission and distribution lines that lie in each state. The EPA 
received several comments regarding this proposed amendment, which are 
discussed in section III.Q.2 of this preamble.
    We are finalizing as proposed the addition of reporting elements to 
subpart DD that are related to the nameplate capacities and numbers of 
pieces of new and retired equipment. Specifically, we are finalizing as 
proposed amendments to add reporting of the nameplate capacities of new 
hermetically sealed-pressure switchgear at 40 CFR 98.306(a)(2), new 
SF6- or PFC-insulated equipment other than hermetically 
sealed-pressure switchgear at 40 CFR 98.306(a)(3), retired hermetically 
sealed-pressure switchgear at 40 CFR 98.306(a)(4), and retired 
SF6- or PFC-insulated equipment other than hermetically 
sealed-pressure switchgear at 40 CFR 98.306(a)(5). We are also 
finalizing as proposed new reporting requirements for the numbers of 
pieces of new hermetically sealed-pressure switchgear during the year 
(40 CFR 98.306(n)(1)); new SF6- or PFC-insulated equipment 
other than hermetically sealed-pressure switchgear during the year (40 
CFR 98.306(n)(2)); retired hermetically sealed-pressure switchgear 
during the year (40 CFR 98.306(n)(3)); and retired SF6- or 
PFC-insulated equipment other than hermetically sealed-pressure 
switchgear during the year (40 CFR 98.306(n)(4)). See section III.Q.2 
of this preamble for the summary of comments and response received on 
the addition of these reporting requirements.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses on Subpart DD
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to the proposed amendments to subpart DD. See the document 
``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for Data 
Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. No. 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart DD.
    Comment: The EPA proposed adding new reporting requirements at 40 
CFR 98.306(m) to make data collected under subpart DD more useful to 
the public. The new data elements would require the electric power 
system to provide the name of the U.S. state, states, or territory in 
which the electric power system lies and the total miles of 
transmission and distribution lines that lie in each state or 
territory. These data elements would allow users of GHGRP data to more 
easily identify the state, states, or territory within which the 
electric power system lies. This would also be useful for determining 
state- and territory-level GHG emissions associated with particular 
electric power systems. Several commenters objected to the proposal 
that electric power systems report information on the miles of 
transmission and distribution lines within each state(s) or territory 
in which the facility lies. Commenters argued that this additional 
reporting requirement would be burdensome on facilities that cross 
state boundaries, as these facilities may not record this information.
    Response: In this final rule, the EPA is adding the requirement to 
report the state(s) or territory in which the electric power system 
lies. This information is readily available to electric power systems 
and the EPA did not receive any comments on this aspect of the proposed 
requirement. The EPA had assumed that facilities would likewise know 
the miles of transmission and distribution miles within each state, but 
commenters stated this was not the case and that the new requirement 
would increase burden. Because the EPA did not intend to require 
submission of information that was not already within the facilities' 
possession, the EPA is only adding the reporting requirement that 
facilities report the state(s) or territory in which they lie. This 
will allow the EPA to provide some information on the location of these 
electric power systems to the users of GHGRP data. Many facilities may 
not cross state or territory borders, and, in these cases, the EPA can 
clearly include the emissions from these facilities in the relevant 
state or territory's emissions totals.
    Comment: Several commenters objected to the proposal that electric 
power systems report detailed information on two categories of 
equipment, SF6- or PFC-insulated hermetically sealed-
pressure equipment and SF6- or PFC-insulated equipment other 
than hermetically sealed-pressure equipment. For each of these 
equipment categories, this information includes the number of pieces of 
new equipment, the number of pieces of retired equipment, the total 
nameplate capacity of new equipment, and the total nameplate capacity 
of retired equipment. Commenters stated that electric power systems do 
not currently record whether or not a particular piece of equipment is 
hermetically sealed when the equipment is purchased and retired. 
Commenters further stated that electric power systems would therefore 
need to reconfigure tracking systems, which would significantly 
increase burden. One of these commenters asserted that the EPA had not 
demonstrated that this increased burden on reporters is necessary in 
light of the limited value of the information it would provide the EPA. 
One commenter stated that equipment manufacturers and suppliers do not 
provide the nameplate capacity of hermetically sealed equipment that 
are components of a larger system, only the nameplate capacity of the 
larger equipment (including all components). Further, some commenters 
stated that the EPA had not adequately defined ``hermetically sealed.''
    Response: The EPA is finalizing its proposal to require electric 
power systems to report detailed information on both SF6- or 
PFC-insulated hermetically sealed-pressure equipment and 
SF6- or PFC-insulated equipment other than hermetically 
sealed-pressure equipment. Regarding the comment that electric power 
systems do not currently record whether equipment is hermetically 
sealed when the equipment is purchased or retired and that tracking 
systems would need to be updated to include these data, the EPA notes 
that electric power system must already distinguish between these two 
equipment types to satisfy the existing reporting requirements in 40 
CFR 98.306. Under the current reporting framework, electric power 
systems must report the nameplate capacity of all equipment in the 
facility at the

[[Page 89223]]

beginning of each year, excluding hermetically sealed-pressure 
switchgear. Electric power systems must then report the nameplate 
capacity of new equipment and equipment retired during the year, 
including hermetically sealed-pressure switchgear.
    When these reporting requirements were initially promulgated, the 
EPA agreed with public comments that it would be too burdensome for 
electric power systems to survey and report the nameplate capacity of 
all hermetically sealed-pressure equipment across the facility at the 
beginning of the year, given that electric power systems could contain 
thousands of pieces of this type of equipment. Thus, the EPA excluded 
hermetically sealed-pressure equipment from the total nameplate 
capacity of equipment at the beginning of the year that must be 
reported by facilities under 40 CFR 98.306(a)(1). However, as discussed 
in the preamble to the final rule (75 FR 74803; December 1, 2010), the 
EPA included hermetically sealed pressure equipment in the nameplate 
capacities of new equipment added to the facility or retired during the 
year under 40 CFR 98.306(a)(2) and (3). Electric power systems have 
subsequently reported these data, including the distinction between 
these equipment types, to the EPA for five years. The EPA does not have 
access to tracking systems used by electric power systems. However, the 
EPA concludes that these systems must distinguish between these 
equipment types in order to meet the existing requirements. It is not 
clear from the comment how the additional level of reporting would 
require an expansion of those tracking systems.
    We are interested in the numbers of pieces of and SF6 
nameplate capacities of electrical equipment (including hermetically 
sealed-pressure equipment) for a number of reasons. As stated in the 
preamble to the proposed rule, this information will provide insight 
into the average SF6 charge sizes of hermetically sealed-
pressure equipment and other SF6-insulated electrical 
equipment, as well as the relative importance of hermetically sealed 
pressure equipment and other SF6-insulated electrical 
equipment as emission sources. Both of these factors affect the choice 
of emission-reducing policies and programs to consider for these two 
types of equipment. For example, hermetically sealed-pressure equipment 
typically leaks very little during its lifetime and is often not 
designed to be serviced. Emissions are generally delayed until the 
equipment is retired. However, at that point, emissions can consist of 
the full charge unless equipment users are aware of the presence of 
SF6 inside the equipment and of the methods for recovering 
it. Discussions with SF6 recycling experts indicate that 
users of hermetically sealed-pressure equipment are sometimes not aware 
that it contains SF6, which is generally not an issue for 
other SF6-insulated equipment. Even when users are aware 
that the hermetically sealed-pressure equipment contains 
SF6, the procedures for effectively and efficiently 
recovering the SF6 from that equipment differ from those for 
recovering the SF6 from other SF6-insulated 
equipment. Because hermetically sealed-pressure equipment generally 
lacks adequate access ports, special piercing devices are often 
required to recover the charge. Similarly, because individual pieces of 
sealed-pressure equipment have relatively small charge sizes, it is 
often most economical to recover the charge from several pieces of 
equipment at one time rather than to recover the charge as each piece 
is decommissioned.\15\ Therefore, if the quantities of SF6 
contained in hermetically sealed-pressure equipment are significant, it 
is important to consider policies and programs that will appropriately 
address these potential end-of-life emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Telephone call between Deborah Ottinger, EPA, and Lukas 
Rothlisberger, Dilo Company, July 29, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are also interested in the quantities of SF6 in 
hermetically sealed-pressure equipment for purposes of improving the 
U.S. GHG Inventory. As indicated in the proposed rule, we currently 
estimate SF6 emissions for electrical transmission and 
distribution facilities that do not report to the GHGRP by developing 
and applying an emission factor based on miles of transmission lines. 
This approach was developed based on the understanding that 
SF6 in U.S. electrical equipment is contained primarily in 
transmission equipment rated above 34.5 kilovolts. However, if a 
significant share of SF6 in U.S. electrical equipment is 
actually contained in hermetically-sealed-pressure equipment, which is 
generally used in lower-voltage distribution applications, then it may 
be appropriate to use miles of distribution lines in addition to miles 
of transmission lines to estimate the emissions of non-reporting 
facilities. We believe that this potential improvement to the 
inventory, as well as the increased insight into the appropriate range 
of policies and programs to reduce emissions from electrical equipment, 
justify the modest additional burden associated with separately 
reporting the nameplate capacities and numbers of pieces of 
hermetically sealed-pressure equipment.
    Regarding the comment that equipment manufacturers and suppliers do 
not provide the nameplate capacity of hermetically sealed-pressure 
equipment that is a component of a larger piece of equipment, the EPA 
does not agree that this as a novel issue that would prevent facilities 
from satisfying the new reporting requirements. As discussed above, 
electric power systems have already been required to report the total 
nameplate capacities of new equipment and retired equipment, including 
hermetically sealed-pressure equipment, under 40 CFR 98.306(a). 
Electric power systems have also been required to update the total 
nameplate capacity of all equipment across the facility, excluding 
hermetically sealed-pressure equipment. Thus, in cases where a larger 
piece of equipment includes both hermetically sealed and other than 
hermetically sealed components, electric power systems have already 
faced the question of how to report these components under the existing 
regulation. In the case where a larger piece of equipment includes both 
hermetically sealed-pressure and other than hermetically sealed-
pressure components, where the hermetically sealed-pressure components 
are an inherent part of the larger equipment, and where the equipment 
manufacturer has included only one nameplate capacity that encompasses 
all components, the electric power system may treat the entirety of the 
larger piece of equipment as other than hermetically sealed-pressure 
for purposes of reporting under subpart DD.
    Regarding the comment that the EPA has not defined ``hermetically 
sealed,'' the EPA again notes that electric power systems have been 
reporting information to EPA for several years, distinguishing between 
hermetically sealed-pressure equipment and other equipment. Several 
references provide definitions for ``sealed pressure systems'' and 
``sealed-for-life equipment,'' including, e.g., the 2006 IPCC 
Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories and the 
International Electrotechnical Commission Standard 60694. The 2006 IPCC 
Guidelines define ``sealed pressure systems'' and ``sealed-for-life 
equipment'' as ``equipment that does not require any refilling (topping 
up) with gas during its lifetime and which generally contains less than 
5 kg of gas per functional unit.'' The EPA's interpretation of 
``hermetically sealed-pressure equipment'' has been and continues to be 
consistent with that of

[[Page 89224]]

these references. In the preamble to the April 10, 2010 proposed rule 
(75 FR 18652) that included subpart DD, the EPA noted that sealed-
pressure equipment, unlike closed-pressure equipment, generally does 
not require periodic refilling (topping up) with gas during its 
lifetime; and in the December 10, 2010 Response to Comments Document 
(available in Docket Id. No EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0927), the EPA observed 
that sealed-pressure equipment generally contains anywhere from a few 
ounces to 15 pounds of SF6. The EPA has not proposed to 
alter the existing conventions in any way. The EPA is expanding the 
reporting requirements to include more details on activities that 
electric power systems are already required to track and report. 
Electric power systems have been able to satisfy these requirements, 
and therefore the EPA does not agree that ``hermetically sealed'' must 
be defined for the purposes of these additional reporting requirements.
3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart DD Become Effective
    As shown in Table 4 of this preamble and consistent with the 
description of amendments in section I.E.2 of this preamble, all 
amendments to subpart DD will be effective on January 1, 2018 as 
proposed and will be reflected starting with RY2017 reports that are 
submitted in 2018.
    We received comment on our proposed schedule for subpart DD 
amendments, requesting an additional year before implementation of the 
new reporting requirements (i.e., reporting separately the nameplate 
capacities and numbers of pieces of hermetically sealed-pressure 
equipment and other equipment installed and retired during the year). 
We proposed that the amendments to subpart DD apply to RY2017 reports. 
The commenter contended that some reporters will need more time to 
update their asset management tracking systems to segregate reporting 
of hermetically sealed-pressure equipment from other types of 
SF6-containing equipment. The commenter provided an example 
facility that will need to revise their Environmental Management 
Information System program, which currently is set up to automatically 
generate their report in XML format. We do not agree that facilities 
subject to subpart DD will need an additional year to revise their 
asset management systems in order to comply with the revised reporting 
requirements. We note that electric power systems must already 
distinguish between the two equipment types to satisfy the existing 
reporting requirements and conclude that asset management systems must 
already distinguish between these equipment types (see section III.Q.2 
of this preamble for additional information). The revised reporting 
requirements for subpart DD do not require electric power systems to 
change what they do to comply with the rule during RY2017. Therefore, 
the final amendments to subpart DD will become effective January 1, 
2018, and be reflected starting with RY2017 reports as proposed, 
meaning that several additional data elements will be submitted for the 
first time in the RY2017 report submitted in 2018.

R. Subpart FF--Underground Coal Mines

    In this action, we are finalizing several amendments, 
clarifications, and corrections to subpart FF of Part 98 (Underground 
Coal Mines). This section discusses the substantive revisions to 
subpart FF; additional minor amendments, corrections, and 
clarifications are summarized in the Final Table of Revisions available 
in the docket for this rulemaking (Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-
0526). We are also finalizing confidentiality determinations for new 
data elements resulting from these revisions to subpart FF; see section 
IV of this preamble and the memorandum ``Final Data Category 
Assignments and Confidentiality Determinations for Data Elements in the 
Final 2015 Revisions'' in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for 
additional information on the final category assignments and 
confidentiality determinations for these data elements.
    The EPA received several comments for subpart FF. Substantive 
comments are addressed in section III.R.2 of this preamble; see the 
document ``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas 
Reporting Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for 
Data Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart FF.
1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart FF
a. Revisions to Subpart FF To Streamline Implementation
    This section describes revisions to Part 98 that will streamline 
implementation of the rule requirements under subpart FF.
    First, the EPA is finalizing, with a change from proposal, an 
amendment to 40 CFR 98.2(i)(3) to give owners and operators of 
underground mines the opportunity to cease reporting under the GHGRP if 
the underground mine(s) are abandoned and sealed. Specifically, we are 
amending paragraph (i)(3) to make clear that for underground coal mines 
cessation of operations also includes that the facility is abandoned 
and sealed, and are deleting ``underground coal mines'' from the list 
of exceptions under paragraph (i)(3). This amendment differs from what 
was included in the proposal for this rule, in which we proposed to 
amend paragraph (i)(3) to state that the paragraph (i)(3) would not 
apply to underground coal mines, except those whose status is 
determined to be ``abandoned'' by MSHA. The final revision to (i)(3) 
more precisely meets the intended purpose of the proposed revision to 
(i)(3), to give owners and operators of abandoned and sealed mines at 
the time they produce quantities of GHG emissions far below the 
reporting threshold the opportunity to cease reporting under the GHGRP. 
See section III.R.2 of this preamble for further discussion of the 
rationale for this change.
    Second, in 40 CFR 98.6, the EPA is finalizing as proposed a 
revision to the definition of ``ventilation hole or shaft.'' The 
definition is being further clarified to include mine portal and adit 
to the definition. Portal and adit are terms sometimes used to describe 
mine entries and shafts. The intent of the rule is to capture all 
points in the ventilation system where methane emissions may exhaust to 
the atmosphere. Adding these terms will provide clarity for reporters. 
The EPA received no comments on the proposed amendment.
    Third, the EPA is finalizing, as proposed, several amendments to 
clarify when moisture content is to be reported. The first several 
amendments apply to 40 CFR 98.326, which lists the data reporting 
requirements for subpart FF. The EPA is amending 40 CFR 98.326(o) to 
require reporting of moisture content only in those cases where the 
volumetric flow rate and CH4 concentration from a specific 
mine ventilation or degasification monitoring point are not measured on 
the same dry or wet basis, and in the case that flow rate is measured 
with a flow meter that does not automatically correct for moisture 
content. For example, if the volumetric flow rate at a specified 
monitoring point is measured on a dry basis but CH4 
concentration at that monitoring point is measured on a wet basis, then 
the reporter must report moisture content for the monitoring point 
unless they are using a flow meter that automatically corrects for 
moisture

[[Page 89225]]

content. The EPA is amending 40 CFR 98.326(f) through (i) to require 
reporters to specify whether volumetric flow rate and CH4 
concentration measurements for ventilation and degasification systems 
are determined on a wet or dry basis. The EPA is also amending 40 CFR 
98.326(f) and (h) to specify that, where a flow meter is used, the 
reporter must indicate whether the flow meter automatically corrects 
for moisture content. This information will provide the necessary 
information for the reporter and for the EPA to determine if moisture 
content should be reported for an individual facility. The EPA received 
no comments on these proposed amendments.
    Last, the EPA is finalizing as proposed several amendments related 
to moisture content in 40 CFR 98.323 and 40 CFR 98.324, which lists the 
requirements for calculating GHG emissions. The EPA is amending 40 CFR 
98.323(a)(2) to read, ``Values of V, C, T, P, and, if applicable, 
(fH2O), . . .'' so that ``if applicable'' more explicitly 
applies to the moisture content term, (fH2O). The EPA is 
making the same amendment to 40 CFR 98.323(b)(1) and 40 CFR 
98.324(b)(1). The revisions to 40 CFR 98.323 and 40 CFR 98.324 are 
being made to ensure consistency with the revision to 40 CFR 98.326(o). 
These revisions will provide clarity for reporters. The EPA received no 
comments on these proposed amendments.
b. Revisions to Subpart FF To Improve the Quality of Data Collected 
Under Part 98
    The EPA proposed three revisions to subpart FF to improve the 
quality of data received by the GHGRP: (1) An amendment to 40 CFR 
98.324(b) to no longer allow MSHA quarterly inspection reports to be 
used as a source of data for monitoring methane liberated from 
ventilation systems; (2) the addition of annual coal production to the 
list of data reporting requirements outlined in 40 CFR 98.326; and (3) 
a revision to 40 CFR 98.324(b)(1) to require use of the most recent 
edition of the MSHA Handbook for inspections and sampling procedures 
entitled, Coal Mine Safety and Health General Inspection Procedures 
Handbook Number: PH13-V-1, February 2013.
    The EPA received no comments on the proposal to require the use of 
the most recent edition of the MSHA Handbook. However, in June 2016, 
MSHA published an updated version of the handbook (see Coal Mine Safety 
and Health General Inspection Procedures Handbook Number: PH16-V-1, 
June 2016 in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQOAR-2015-0526). Following review of 
this update, we have determined that the inspection and sampling 
procedures contained in the June 2016 edition of the MSHA Handbook are 
not significantly different from the procedures contained in the 
February 2013 edition of the Handbook, which was the most recent 
edition at the time of the proposal. We are finalizing in 40 CFR 
98.324(b)(1) a requirement to use the procedures in the June 2016 MSHA 
Handbook as they are the most current and appropriate for use under the 
GHGRP, and will improve the quality of the data collected under the 
GHGRP as intended in the proposed rule.
    Based on consideration of public comment and as discussed in 
section II.R.2 of this preamble, the EPA is not finalizing the 
requirement to report coal production data or the revision to eliminate 
the use of MSHA quarterly inspection reports to be used as a source of 
data for monitoring methane liberated from ventilation systems. Rather, 
the EPA is finalizing a more limited amendment to the subpart FF 
reporting requirements, amending 40 CFR 98.326(a) to require each mine 
relying on data obtained from MSHA to report methane liberated from 
ventilation systems to the GHGRP to include, as attachments to its 
GHGRP report, the MSHA reports it relied upon to complete the GHGRP 
report. This amendment will help the EPA assist reporters in 
interpreting the MSHA data correctly during verification, thus 
resulting in an improvement in the quality of the data reported to the 
GHGRP, as intended in the proposal, by mines that choose to rely on 
MSHA data. This assistance will build upon the guidance the EPA 
provided in 2015 in the document ``Technical Guidance on Using Mine 
Ventilation Data from the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) 
to report Quarterly Methane Emissions from Mine Ventilation Systems.'' 
\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-08/documents/tech_guidance_mine_vent_data.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Other Amendments to Subpart FF
    This section describes final amendments being made to Part 98 in 
response to issues raised by reporters and to more closely align rule 
requirements with the processes conducted at specific facilities. The 
following revisions to subpart FF are in response to comments and 
questions we have received since reporting under subpart FF began in 
2011. The EPA did not receive comment on any of these proposed 
revisions and is therefore finalizing these amendments as proposed.
    First, in 40 CFR 98.323(a) and (b), we are clarifying, for 
Equations FF-1 and FF-3, the method for determining the number of days 
in a month or week (n) where active ventilation and degasification are 
taking place. In both equations, the definition of Number of Days (n) 
is being clarified to note that (n) is determined by taking the number 
of hours in the monitoring period and dividing by 24 hours per day.
    Second, in 40 CFR 98.323(b)(2), the text is being amended to state 
that the quarterly sum of CH4 liberated from ventilation and 
degasification systems, respectively, ``must be'' rather than ``should 
be'' determined as the sum of the CH4 liberated at each 
monitoring point during that quarter. This revision is being made 
because calculating the quarterly sum of CH4 liberated is 
required rather than being optional.
    Third, in 40 CFR 98.326(r)(2), we are clarifying the start date and 
end date for a well, shaft, or vent hole. The start date of a well, 
shaft, or vent hole is the date of actual initiation of operations and 
may begin in a year prior to the reporting year. For purposes of 
reporting, we are amending paragraph (r)(2) to state that the end date 
of a well, shaft, or vent hole is the last day of the reporting year if 
the well, shaft, or vent hole is operating on that date.
    Fourth, in 40 CFR 98.326(r)(3), we are adding language clarifying 
the method for determining and reporting the number of days a well, 
shaft, or vent hole was in operation during the reporting year. The 
number of days is determined by dividing the total operating hours in 
the reporting year by 24 hours per day. This revision is consistent 
with similar revisions to the method for determining number of days in 
Equations FF-1 and FF-3, discussed earlier in this section.
    Last, the EPA is finalizing the amendment to remove ``if 
applicable'' in 40 CFR 98.324(h) to clarify that the provision 
requiring the owner or operator to document the procedures used to 
ensure the accuracy of gas flow rate, gas composition, temperature, 
pressure, and moisture content measurements is a requirement for all 
reporters.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses on Subpart FF
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to the proposed amendments to subpart FF. See the document 
``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Rule: 2015 Revisions and

[[Page 89226]]

Confidentiality Determinations for Data Elements under the Greenhouse 
Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. No EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a 
complete listing of all comments and responses related to subpart FF.
    Comment: In the proposed rule the EPA included a requirement that 
subpart FF reporters would be able, under provision 40 CFR 98.2(i)(3), 
to discontinue reporting the GHGRP once their status is determined to 
be ``abandoned'' by MSHA. Commenters responded to this proposal by 
noting that there is often a significant time lag between when a mine 
is abandoned and sealed and when MSHA makes publicly available in its 
Mine Data Retrieval System (MDRS) that a mine has been abandoned and 
sealed. Therefore, according to the commenters, if EPA were to finalize 
the amendment as proposed, some abandoned and sealed mines would be 
required to report while awaiting an update to their abandonment status 
in the MDRS database.
    Response: The EPA agrees with this observation, and in addition has 
determined that, because reports submitted by abandoned and sealed 
mines during the first four years of the GHGRP show that such mines 
produce quantities of GHG emissions far below the reporting threshold, 
these data are of limited value for the GHGRP and result in additional 
reporting burden for facilities. Therefore, the EPA has determined that 
it is appropriate to enable underground coal mines that have ceased 
operations and have been abandoned and sealed to cease reporting to the 
GHGRP per the provisions of 40 CFR 98.2(i)(3). We are therefore 
revising the text in this paragraph to delete ``underground coal 
mines'' from the list of exceptions and adding the following sentence: 
``Cessation of operations, in the context of underground coal mines, 
includes, but is not limited to, abandoning and sealing the facility.'' 
Rather than stating that paragraph (i)(3) would not apply to 
underground coal mines, as was proposed, the change from proposal that 
we are finalizing more precisely meets the proposed revisions' intended 
purpose of enabling abandoned and sealed mines to cease reporting when 
they are no longer operating, and are producing GHG emissions far below 
the threshold, consistent with the provisions for other facility types 
covered by the GHGRP that are allowed to cease reporting after 
cessation of operations under this provision. We have removed the 
proposed requirement that we rely on the MSHA determination of the 
mine's operational status as ``abandoned'' as, while that was one 
mechanism to provide confidence that the closed mines are sealed and 
therefore not emitting methane, by explicitly describing in 40 CFR 
98.2(i)(3) that cessation of operations for underground coal mines 
includes that the facility is abandoned and sealed, we are providing a 
similar level of confidence an MSHA determination would. Allowing 
underground coal mines that have ceased operations and are abandoned 
and sealed to stop reporting to the GHGRP will streamline reporting 
under subpart FF by limiting reporting to facilities actively emitting 
measurable volumes of CH4.
    Furthermore, the EPA believes that the amendment to 40 CFR 
98.2(i)(3) has the added benefit of removing a perceived conflict with 
40 CFR 98.320(c), ``Definition of the source category'', in subpart FF. 
This provision exempts abandoned and closed underground coal mines as 
source categories required to report to the GHGRP. The EPA believes the 
amendment to 40 CFR 98.2(i)(3) will remove any ambiguity and 
uncertainty, clarifying when underground coal mines may cease reporting 
to the GHGRP and streamlining implementation of the GHGRP.
    Comment: In the proposed rule the EPA included an amendment to 40 
CFR 98.324(b) to no longer allow MSHA quarterly inspection reports to 
be used as a source of data for monitoring methane liberated from 
ventilation systems. Several commenters disagreed with the removal of 
the MSHA method, and one commenter stated that the EPA should ``[allow] 
reporters to demonstrate the validity of the MSHA data for their 
mines'' and recommended that the EPA ``allow reporters to propose, for 
EPA approval, mechanisms by which their site specific data can be 
demonstrated to meet a baseline quality criterion for 40 CFR part 98 
reporting purposes.''
    Response: The EPA proposed to disallow the use of MSHA data because 
we determined that, through several reporting cycles and a review of 
MSHA quarterly inspection reports for 30 of the highest emitting mines, 
the quarterly flow rate data gathered by MSHA, standing alone, cannot 
reliably be used for GHGRP reporting purposes. The EPA's concerns with 
respect to reliability and consistency in MSHA sampling have not been 
with MSHA's procedure for taking samples in shaft approaches. The EPA 
is not questioning or discounting the veracity of MSHA monitoring. On 
the contrary, as evidenced by the continued reference to MSHA's 
Inspection Handbook, the EPA supports the sampling method used by MSHA. 
Instead, as stated in the preamble to the proposed rule, our concerns 
have centered on the data gaps created by changes in reported sampling 
locations, by the inconsistent naming of approaches where samples are 
taken from quarter-to-quarter, and with the errors made by reporters 
when interpreting the data contained in the MSHA report for use in 
their GHGRP reports.
    In the preamble to the proposed rule, the EPA expressed concern 
with data gaps where MSHA quarterly reports did not include 
CH4 concentration and volumetric air flow data from a mine 
shaft approach in a reporting quarter. A mine ventilation shaft 
aggregates ventilation flow from one or more approaches that are, in 
effect, horizontal tunnels carrying ventilation air to an upcast shaft. 
To calculate the methane liberation for the shaft, the MSHA inspector 
takes volumetric air flow measurements and air samples for 
CH4 concentration measurements in each approach. Total 
methane flow in each approach is calculated from these measurements. 
MSHA then adds the methane flows for each approach to calculate total 
CH4 liberation for the shaft. There are occasions when an 
MSHA inspector does not take air samples and volumetric flow 
measurements in a particular approach for safety or other reasons, even 
though samples were taken in the previous quarter. For example, the 
ventilation shaft may aggregate flow from three approaches and in 
quarter 3 of the reporting year, MSHA measures CH4 
concentration and volumetric air flow in only two of the approaches. 
This can result in a significant change in reported methane liberation 
at the subject ventilation shaft in quarter 3 if the reporter only adds 
two approaches' values together, rather than accounting for three 
approaches.
    The GHGRP specifies required procedures to use when data are 
missing (40 CFR 98.325). Additionally, as outlined in the guidance 
document ``Technical Guidance on Using Mine Ventilation Data from the 
Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) to report Quarterly 
Methane Emissions from Mine Ventilation Systems'' (hereafter referred 
to as the ``Mine Ventilation Data Guidance Document''),\17\ we 
recommend that the reporter use Missing Data procedures to estimate 
methane flow in the third approach for quarter 3 for scenarios

[[Page 89227]]

such as when the third approach is still active and samples are taken 
in the following quarter. The reported methane liberation at the 
ventilation monitoring point for quarter 3 in the subpart FF report 
would then include actual measurements from two approaches and 
estimated measurements using missing data procedures for one approach. 
We originally proposed removing MSHA reports as a monitoring method, in 
part, because it is very difficult for the EPA to confirm the reported 
methane liberation value in a given quarter without some type of 
supporting data. This concern will be addressed by submission of the 
MSHA quarterly reports because EPA access to the MSHA quarterly reports 
will allow the Agency to verify whether this process has been followed, 
identify where the data gaps occur, advise the reporter how to address 
the data gaps, and verify the report when corrected.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-08/documents/tech_guidance_mine_vent_data.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The second concern the EPA identified in the preamble to the 
proposed rule with MSHA data was the use of different names for the 
same approaches. Approaches to mine shafts are assigned a name by the 
MSHA inspector in the quarterly MSHA inspection reports. There are 
instances where an MSHA inspector assigns a name to an approach that is 
different from the name given previously. First, it is important to 
understand that this is likely to impact a subpart FF report only when 
the Agent or Designated Representative of the subpart FF report is 
unfamiliar with the mine plan. The EPA believes that most reporters 
understand their operations well and misreporting is likely only in a 
limited number of cases. Additionally, the EPA believes that even when 
different names are used for the same approach, they are often similar 
enough to conclude that they are referring to the same approach. And 
again, the EPA believes that reporters are knowledgeable enough of 
their operations to correctly align the same shaft approach even where 
the name is different. Still, without further information, such as the 
submission of MSHA quarterly reports, the EPA lacks critical 
information necessary for verifying subpart FF reports where this data 
gap potentially exists. The MSHA report provides the EPA with a quick 
set of reference data to compare to the subpart FF report and allow the 
EPA to accurately advise the reporter during the verification process 
on the potential error and the solution; thus, facilitating more 
accurate and timely reporting under subpart FF.
    The final concern EPA identified was incorrect interpretation of 
MSHA data by reporters when translating information from the MSHA 
reports into their subpart FF reporting. Similar to what was described 
above, without further information, such as the submission of MSHA 
quarterly reports, the EPA lacks critical information necessary for 
verifying subpart FF reports where these errors potentially occur. 
Again, submission of the MSHA report will address this concern by 
providing the EPA with a quick set of reference data to compare to the 
subpart FF report, which the EPA can then utilize to correct errors 
during the verification process.
    Although the EPA expressed concerns with the use of MSHA data in 
the preamble to the proposed rule, we also noted that ``if complete, 
MSHA data may provide a reasonable estimate of methane emissions from 
underground coal mines.'' We also sought comment on whether there are 
other alternatives that would achieve the same objectives for improved 
data quality from mine ventilation systems and encouraged commenters to 
submit studies, data, and background information that could support 
additional analysis (81 FR2566). No comments were received that 
discussed other alternatives or provided supporting information.
    After careful consideration, the EPA is convinced that 
implementation of a sound quality assurance process entailing the 
submission of the MSHA reports on which the subpart FF data are based, 
combined with our ability to correct errors through the verification 
process, will sufficiently address the EPA's stated concerns regarding 
the potential for gaps in MSHA data. The MSHA quarterly reports will 
allow a direct comparison with the subpart FF report so that the EPA 
may follow up with the reporter during the verification process if 
there are inconsistencies. We also continue to encourage use of the 
Mine Ventilation Data Guidance Document to streamline the quality 
assurance process. The Mine Ventilation Data Guidance Document not only 
presents examples of MSHA quarterly reports and how to interpret them, 
but discusses procedures to use when data are missing as required by 
the rule (40 CFR 98.325). The EPA believes that these measures will 
encourage greater consistency in identifying shafts and approaches by 
common reference names and clarify the number of approaches to each 
upcast shaft.
    Therefore, the EPA is retaining the ability for mines to use MSHA 
data, and is including in this final rule an amendment to 40 CFR 
98.324(b) requiring each facility using MSHA data to attach to its 
annual GHGRP report the quarterly MSHA reports it relied upon to 
prepare its annual GHGRP report. This will enable the EPA to verify the 
MSHA data against that reported to the GHGRP while limiting additional 
burden to the reporter. Reporters using MSHA data as the monitoring 
method are in possession of the MSHA quarterly reports, since they 
relied upon these reports to complete the subpart FF annual report. 
Moreover, use of MSHA data is one of three monitoring method options 
currently available to reporters. Reporters remain free to choose 
either of two other alternatives that exist in the rule: Grab samples 
(40 CFR 98.324(b)(1)) or a continuous emissions monitoring system or 
CEMS (40 CFR 98.324(b)(3)).
    Comment: Commenters objected to the new proposed requirement to 
report coal production information to the EPA in order to facilitate 
the verification process, stating that methane liberated may have 
little relationship to coal production.
    Response: The requirement to report coal production was proposed 
because such data would enable the EPA to directly evaluate, in a 
facility's GHGRP report itself, whether a mine's emission trend and its 
coal production trend appear reasonably aligned. Such an evaluation 
would reduce burden on reporters by reducing the number of verification 
messages these reporters would receive when EPA reviewed changes in 
emissions. While the EPA recognizes that many factors impact methane 
liberation, including the rate of coal production, mine development, 
geologic conditions, changes in the mine plan, changes in the 
ventilation plan, and other factors, the EPA also observes that coal 
production and methane emissions are often closely aligned. Therefore, 
the EPA believes that coal production data facilitates a more accurate 
and effective verification process for the GHGRP.
    However, the EPA recognizes that information on each mine's coal 
production is publicly available through the MSHA database by April 1 
of each year, in time for the EPA to begin verification activities on 
submitted GHGRP reports. Therefore, rather than requiring mines to 
report coal production information to the EPA in their subpart FF 
reports as proposed, the EPA is not including this requirement in this 
final rule, and will instead continue to rely on the publicly available 
data published by MSHA to compare trends in each mine's coal production 
with its reported methane emissions. However, the EPA notes that, if 
MSHA changes the publication date for this information to a later date, 
mines may anticipate an increase in the number of data verification 
messages from the EPA

[[Page 89228]]

enquiring about emissions changes from year to year.
3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart FF Become Effective
    As shown in Table 3 of this preamble and consistent with the 
description of amendments in sections I.E.1 of this preamble, one 
amendment to subpart FF will be effective on January 1, 2017 and will 
be reflected starting with RY2017 reports that are submitted in 2018. 
All other amendments to subpart FF are effective on January 1, 2018 as 
shown in Table 4 of this preamble and are consistent with the 
description of amendments effective on that date in section I.E.2 of 
this preamble. Although one amendment to subpart FF is effective 
January 1, 2017 and others are effective January 1, 2018, all 
amendments to subpart FF will be reflected in RY2017 reports that are 
submitted in 2018 as shown in Tables 3 and 4 of this preamble. These 
effective dates are different from what was proposed for subpart FF. 
Although no comments were received related specifically to the timing 
of revisions to subpart FF, several of the final amendments to subpart 
FF are significantly different from what was proposed, due to 
consideration of comments that were received. As a result, we are also 
finalizing effective dates that are different from what was proposed.
    We are finalizing that the subpart FF revision to 40 CFR 
98.324(b)(1), and the corresponding amendment to 40 CFR 98.7(l)(1), 
which update the references to the MSHA Handbook to reflect the most 
recent 2016 version, are effective on January 1, 2017, and will be 
implemented starting in RY2017. At proposal these amendments were to be 
implemented starting in RY2018 along with all other changes to subpart 
FF. As discussed in the preamble to the proposed amendments (81 FR 
2543, January 15, 2016), we had selected RY2018 as the proposed date 
for all revisions related to FF to be implemented (except revisions to 
40 CFR 98.2(i) streamlining the reporting requirements for closed coal 
mines, which we proposed to be implemented starting with RY2017) 
because those proposed revisions included removal of the option in 40 
CFR 98.324(b)(2) to use MSHA quarterly inspection reports as a source 
of data for monitoring methane liberated from ventilation systems. We 
had determined that it would not have been feasible for facilities to 
acquire, install, and calibrate new monitoring equipment or to perform 
more frequent monitoring, and would not have been feasible for the EPA 
to integrate all associated revisions to reporting requirements into e-
GGRT and verification activities, in time for RY2017. However, in our 
final rule amendments for subpart FF, we are not finalizing our 
proposed removal of the option to use MSHA quarterly inspection reports 
as a source of data for monitoring methane liberated from ventilation 
systems. Refer to section III.R.2 of this preamble for a discussion of 
the comments received on the EPA's proposed removal of the option to 
use MSHA quarterly reports and the EPA's rationale for not finalizing 
its proposal. The update to the MSHA Handbook reflected in the subpart 
FF revision to 40 CFR 98.324(b)(1), and the corresponding amendments to 
40 CFR 98.7(l)(1) are feasible for reporters to implement in RY2017, as 
they will not result in wholesale monitoring changes and will not 
require any changes to the e-GGRT system or verification activities. As 
a result, we are finalizing the effective date for these provisions as 
January 1, 2017.
    With the exception of 40 CFR 98.324(b)(1), as described above, we 
are making the amendments to subpart FF effective January 1, 2018; they 
will be reflected in RY2017 reports. As discussed in the preamble to 
the proposed amendments (81 FR 2543; January 15, 2016) and in section 
I.E.2 of this preamble, while we had stated that these revisions would 
apply beginning January 1, 2018, we had also made clear that our 
intention with this proposal was that this corresponded to these 
revisions first being reflected in RY2018 reports for all revisions 
related to subpart FF (except revisions in 40 CFR 98.2(i) of subpart A, 
streamlining the reporting requirements for closed coal mines, which we 
proposed to be implemented starting with RY2017). However, since we are 
not finalizing our proposed removal of the option to use MSHA quarterly 
inspection reports as a source of data for monitoring methane liberated 
from ventilation systems, the amendments to subpart FF can now be 
reflected in the RY2017 reports that are submitted in 2018. The final 
revisions do not substantially revise the monitoring requirements and 
are consistent with the data collection and calculation methodologies 
in the current rule. Where the EPA is requiring reporting of additional 
information or data, such as requiring each facility using MSHA data to 
attach to its annual GHGRP report the quarterly MSHA reports it relied 
upon to prepare its annual GHGRP report, the data collected are readily 
available to reporters. Where calculation equations are modified, the 
changes clarify terms in the emission calculation equations and do not 
materially affect monitoring requirements or how emissions are 
calculated. Furthermore, at proposal, we requested comment on whether 
underground coal mine facilities would be able to meet ``these revised 
requirements'' by RY2017 (81 FR 2543, January 15, 2016). We received no 
comments indicating that these revisions could not be implemented and 
reflected started with RY2017 reports. For these reasons, we have 
determined that January 1, 2018, is an appropriate effective date and 
provides sufficient time for reporters to adjust to these amendments 
for RY2017 reports submitted in 2018.

S. Subpart HH--Municipal Solid Waste Landfills

    In this action, we are finalizing several amendments to subpart HH 
of Part 98 (Municipal Solid Waste Landfills) to reduce burden for 
reporters, improve data quality, clarify terms, and take final action 
on our reconsideration of all issues in a Petition for 
Reconsideration.\18\ We are completing our response to the Petition for 
Reconsideration through this rulemaking. This section discusses the 
substantive revisions to subpart HH. We are finalizing as proposed the 
minor corrections and clarifications to subpart HH of Part 98, 
including editorial changes and clarifications to reporting 
requirements. These minor revisions are summarized in the Final Table 
of Revisions available in the docket for this rulemaking (Docket Id. 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526). We are also finalizing confidentiality 
determinations for new and revised data elements resulting from the 
revisions to subpart HH; see section IV of this preamble and the 
memorandum ``Final Data Category Assignments and Confidentiality 
Determinations for Data Elements in the Proposed 2015 Revisions'' in 
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for additional information on the 
final category assignments and confidentiality determinations for these 
data elements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Waste Management Petition for Reconsideration of 2013 
Revisions to Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule and Final Confidentiality 
Determinations for New or Substantially Revised Data Elements. 
Available in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA received several comments for subpart HH. Substantive 
comments are addressed in section III.S.2 of this preamble; see the 
document ``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas 
Reporting Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality

[[Page 89229]]

Determinations for Data Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Rule'' in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of 
all comments and responses related to subpart HH.
1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart HH
a. Revisions to Subpart HH To Streamline Implementation
    We are finalizing as proposed the revision to 40 CFR 98.346(f) to 
remove the requirement to report the surface area for each type of 
cover material used at the facility to reduce burden for reporters. As 
we stated in the proposed rule (81 FR 2567), the final amendment will 
still require the reporting of the total surface area of the landfill 
containing waste (in square meters) and an identification of the 
type(s) of cover material used, as this information is used during 
verification to check the consistency of the collection efficiency 
reported by the landfill. No comments were received on this proposed 
revision. This revision will reduce burden to reporters, and that the 
surface area for each cover material used has not been useful in 
assessing or verifying reported emissions.
b. Revisions to Subpart HH To Improve the Quality of Data Collected 
Under Part 98
    We are finalizing as proposed revisions to 40 CFR 98.346(i)(5) to 
require reporting of the annual operating hours of the gas collection 
system associated with the measurement location, and to require 
reporting of the destruction efficiency and annual operating hours 
active gas flow was sent to the destruction device associated with the 
measurement location. We are also finalizing as proposed the removal of 
the requirement to report the annual operating hours for each 
destruction device associated with a given measurement location. In 
addition, we are finalizing as proposed the revision to move the 
requirement to report the annual operating hours of the gas collection 
system for each measurement location from 40 CFR 98.346(i)(7) to 40 CFR 
98.346(i)(5) to consolidate all reporting requirements that are 
associated with each measurement location to the same paragraph, 
consistent with reporting organization used in e-GGRT. No comments were 
received on these proposed revisions. These revisions will allow the 
EPA to collect data that will improve the EPA's understanding of sector 
GHG emissions, allow for more accurate calculation of emissions by e-
GGRT, and facilitate verification of the data reported, while generally 
resulting in only a slight burden for reporters.
    We are not finalizing the proposed revisions to the method to 
calculate the gas collection efficiency, thus reporters continue to be 
required to use the current area-based approach as defined in Table HH-
3 to subpart HH. The EPA did not receive comments in support of the 
volume-based approach, or in support of allowing facilities to use 
either approach. We did receive comments in support of maintaining the 
area-based approach, and after consideration of such comments, we are 
not amending the approach to calculate the gas collection efficiency. 
See section III.S.2 of this preamble for further explanation of the 
comments received and the EPA's responses.
    After consideration of comments received, we are finalizing with 
changes our proposed revisions regarding the description of area type 
A5 in Table HH-3 and the proposed definition of alternative final 
covers. In the description of area type A5 in Table HH-3 in this final 
rule, we are removing ``alternative'' from the portion of the proposed 
description ``. . . alternative final cover (as approved by the 
relevant agency) . . .'' We are also finalizing a definition of final 
cover in 40 CFR 98.348 to mean ``materials used at a landfill to meet 
final closure regulations of the relevant federal, state, or local 
authority'' instead of the proposed definition of ``alternative final 
cover.'' These changes from proposal will still achieve the intended 
purpose, as described in the proposed rule (81 FR 2568), of broadening 
the description of area type A5 to include alternative final covers so 
that facilities with landfill gas collection and alternative final 
covers, that had been approved by the state, local, or other agency 
responsible for permitting the landfill, can use the 95 percent 
collection efficiency in their emissions calculations. See section 
III.S.2 for a summary of the comments received and the EPA's responses.
    We are finalizing as proposed the addition of the ``methane 
emissions for the landfill'' as a reporting element in 40 CFR 
98.346(i)(13). This new paragraph directs reporters to ``Choose the 
methane emissions from either Equation HH-6 of this subpart or Equation 
HH-8 of this subpart that best represents the emissions from the 
landfill. If the quantity of recovered CH4 from Equation HH-
4 of this subpart is used as the value of GCH4 in Equation 
HH-6 of this subpart, use the methane emissions calculated using 
Equation HH-8 of this subpart as the methane emissions for the 
landfill.'' No comments were received on this proposed revision. We 
reference our review and conclusions described in the proposed rule (81 
FR 2568). These revisions are necessary to prevent inaccurate values 
from being reported as the final subpart HH methane emissions.
c. Other Amendments to Subpart HH and Grant of Petition for 
Reconsideration
    On January 28, 2014, the EPA received an administrative petition 
for reconsideration from Waste Management, Inc. (hereafter referred to 
as ``Petitioner''), regarding the inclusion of minimum soil cover 
requirements in order to use the flux-dependent soil oxidation 
fractions, titled ``Waste Management's Petition for Reconsideration of 
2013 Revisions to Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule and Final 
Confidentiality Determinations for New or Substantially Revised Data 
Elements Docket Id. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934'' (hereafter referred to as 
the ``Petition for Reconsideration,'' available in the docket for this 
rulemaking). See the proposal for this final rule (81 FR 2569) for a 
detailed discussion of the specific issue raised in the Petition for 
Reconsideration, the review and analysis that was undertaken since the 
Petition for Reconsideration was received, and the revisions the EPA 
proposed in response to the petition.
    Consistent with our previous review and analysis, we are finalizing 
the amendments to revise and clarify the soil cover requirements in 
Table HH-4 to subpart HH as follows. First, we are finalizing as 
proposed the amendment to revise the requirement for ``. . . a soil 
cover of at least 24 inches . . .'' to read ``. . . final cover or 
intermediate or interim soil cover . . .'' Second, we are finalizing as 
proposed the definition of intermediate or interim soil cover in 40 CFR 
98.348 to mean ``the placement of material over waste in a landfill for 
a period of time prior to disposal of additional waste and/or final 
closure as defined by state regulation, permit, guidance or written 
plan, or state accepted best management practice.'' Third, we are 
finalizing as proposed the addition of a footnote to Table HH-4 stating 
that the landfill must have a soil cover of 12 inches or greater to use 
an oxidation fraction of 0.25 or 0.35, to address the case where a 
landfill is located in a state that does not have an intermediate or 
interim soil cover requirement as defined. We are addressing in this 
final action the Petition for Reconsideration through these specific 
revisions to Table HH-4,

[[Page 89230]]

directly addressing the concerns raised by the Petitioner as we deem 
appropriate after full evaluation of the information presented by 
Petitioners, further review and analysis as described in the proposed 
rule, and consideration of comments received on the proposed revisions. 
The EPA is completing its response to the Petition for Reconsideration 
through this rulemaking. See section III.S.2 of this preamble for 
further explanation of the comments received and our responses.
    In addition, with regard to Table HH-4, which contains descriptions 
of the conditions under which certain oxidation fractions may be used 
in the emissions calculations, we are finalizing as proposed the 
revision to the phrase ``. . . for a majority of the landfill area 
containing waste . . .'' to read ``. . . for at least 50 percent of the 
landfill area containing waste . . .'' to clarify that we intend the 
majority of the landfill to mean 50 percent or more by area. After 
consideration of public comments received, which contained suggested 
revisions to Table HH-4, we are additionally revising conditions C4, 
C5, C6, and C7 to begin with the phrase ``For landfills that do not 
meet the conditions in C2 or C3 above . . .'', and revising condition 
C2 to remove ``. . . an alternative final cover (approved by the 
relevant agency) . . .'' and add ``. . . or other non-soil barrier 
meeting the definition of final cover. . . .'' We are finalizing these 
related additional changes to Table HH-4 so that Table HH-4 more 
clearly states which oxidation fraction may be used in calculating 
emissions depending upon conditions in place at the landfill. We agree 
that the text provided by commenters, in addition to what was proposed, 
provides even further clarity so that a landfill owner or operator can 
be certain as to which oxidation fraction is appropriate to use. These 
changes will also allow the descriptions in Table HH-4 to be consistent 
with the revisions to Table HH-3 and the addition of the definition for 
final cover instead of alternative final cover, as described in section 
II.S.1.b of this preamble.
    Lastly, after consideration of comments, we are not finalizing 
revisions to Table HH-4 to require landfills that have passive or 
active vent systems that service greater than 50-percent of the 
landfill area containing waste or landfills that have only passive or 
active vent systems to use the default 10 percent oxidation fraction in 
their emission calculations because we think there is currently a lack 
of rigorous, scientifically based measurement data on methane oxidation 
for landfills meeting the criteria at issue. Although we are not 
finalizing the proposed revisions to Table HH-4 that used the term 
``passive vent,'' we are finalizing the proposed definition of this 
term in 40 CFR 98.348 since it is still included in 40 CFR 98.346(h) 
and (i)(7), and such definition is useful for reporters. We are not 
finalizing the proposed definition of ``active venting'' since, with 
the final subpart HH revisions described above, this term will not be 
used in this subpart. See section III.S.2 for the comments received and 
the EPA's responses.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to the proposed amendments to subpart HH. See the document 
``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for Data 
Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. No. 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart HH.
    Comment: Several commenters provided feedback on the EPA's proposal 
and request for comment on whether revisions should be made to Table 
HH-3 to allow reporters to be given the option to calculate collection 
efficiency using the existing area weighted average approach or a 
proposed volume weighted average approach, whether reporters should be 
required to use one approach over another depending on landfill 
specific characteristics, and what those characteristics should be. The 
commenters were firmly supportive of maintaining the current area 
weighted average approach stating that reporters have used this 
approach since the beginning of the program and have become familiar 
with collecting data and performing the calculations as required. 
Commenters further questioned why the EPA would propose a method such 
as the volume weighted average that is not supported in peer-reviewed 
scientific literature, stating that waste depth and refuse volume were 
not parameters considered in peer-reviewed studies, so their effect on 
collection efficiency is undetermined. In contrast, commenters state 
that the area weighted method is grounded in peer-reviewed scientific 
literature. The commenters expressed concern that the EPA would set 
site specific conditions under which one or the other calculation 
method would be required to be used. Lastly, the commenters state that 
the EPA has not provided any analysis showing that a change in approach 
will improve emission estimates and may instead introduce further 
uncertainty to the calculations. No comments were received providing 
support for a volume weighted average approach or the option to use 
such a method. Additionally, no comments were received on site specific 
conditions when one approach might be more appropriate or accurate than 
the other.
    Response: The area-based approach for calculating the collection 
efficiency for the entire facility relies on the surface area while the 
volume-based approach relies on both the surface area and the depth of 
each area type in Table HH-3. These parameters are included in the 
current reporting requirements for subpart HH. During both the 
reporting period and while verifying the data submitted in GHG reports, 
we received questions and suggestions from reporters via the GHGRP Help 
Desk to improve the methodology for calculating the collection 
efficiency specifically for older landfills with large surface areas 
without active gas collection (area type A2 in Table HH-3). The 
reporters stated that the current area-based calculation overestimates 
emissions results and that a volume-based calculation may be more 
accurate for these scenarios. For these reasons the EPA proposed the 
option of a volume-weighted approach to calculate collection 
efficiency. The EPA did a cursory examination of reported data in 2013, 
but we were not able to find a definitive set of criteria that would 
support requiring facilities to use the volume-based approach over the 
area-based approach, which is why we requested feedback on this option 
and when it could be used. After consideration of comments and based on 
our current inability to determine when it would be appropriate for a 
facility to use the proposed alternative approach, we will maintain the 
ability for reporters to use the area-based approach to calculate the 
collection efficiency and are not finalizing the additional option to 
calculate the collection efficiency at this time.
    As described in the EPA Peer Review Handbook,\19\ the EPA considers 
peer-reviewed material to have undergone a documented in-depth 
assessment of the assumptions, calculations, extrapolations, alternate 
interpretations, methodology, acceptance criteria, and conclusions 
pertaining to the scientific or technical work product and the 
documents that support them. This

[[Page 89231]]

assessment must be conducted by qualified individuals or organizations 
who are independent of those who performed the work and who are 
collectively equivalent in technical expertise to those who performed 
the original work. The commenters state that their primary concern is 
that the volume-based approach to calculating collection efficiency has 
no basis in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, whereas the area-
weighted approach does; however, no citations were provided by the 
commenter documenting peer review of the area-weighted approach. Both 
the area-weighted and volume-based approaches were developed using 
technical knowledge and engineering concepts. The EPA is not aware that 
these approaches to estimate landfill gas collection efficiency have 
been published in peer-reviewed journal articles, reports, or other 
peer-reviewed materials.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. October 2015. Peer 
Review Handbook 4th Edition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment: Several commenters provided feedback on the EPA's proposal 
to broaden the description of area type A5 in Table HH-3 to include 
alterative final covers and provide a definition of alternative final 
covers in 40 CFR 98.348. Some commenters generally supported the 
concept of these changes but they requested clarifying the language to 
avoid ambiguity. These commenters stated that the Resource Conservation 
and Recovery Act (RCRA) subtitle D authorizes states to approve final 
covers with designs or materials that differ from federal performance 
requirements as long as the state determines that they are equally 
protective. These covers are simply called ``final covers'' and 
commenters felt the GHG reporting rule should refer to them using the 
same terminology. Commenters suggested a definition for use in 40 CFR 
98.348 as follows: Final cover means materials used at a landfill that 
meets final closure regulations of the competent federal, state, or 
local authority. Commenters also suggested corresponding edits to 
Tables HH-3 and HH-4 where the term is used.
    Response: We agree with the commenters that adding the term final 
cover versus alternative final cover best meets the intent of our 
proposed revision, and are therefore finalizing with several changes 
from proposal. The state, local, or other agency responsible for 
permitting the landfill determines whether a final cover meets the 
applicable regulatory requirements and has been shown to adequately 
protect human health and the environment. As such, we are providing a 
definition for final cover to reflect the appropriate terminology used 
by those entities and consistent with RCRA subtitle D, to mean 
materials used at a landfill to meet final closure regulations of the 
relevant federal, state, or local authority. This definition is 
inclusive of both traditional and alternative final covers. Because the 
term `final cover,' as defined, better captures the intent of the 
proposal, we are not including the term `alternative final cover' in 
this final rule. We also proposed to revise area type A5 in Table HH-3 
with the intention of broadening the description of area type A5 to 
include alternative final covers, so that facilities with landfill gas 
collection and alternative final covers, that had been approved by the 
state, local, or other agency responsible for permitting the landfill, 
can use the 95 percent collection efficiency in their emissions 
calculations. We similarly proposed to revise condition C2 in Table HH-
4 to account for landfills with final covers that consist of material 
other than geomembranes by adding the term alternative final cover. 
After consideration of the comments and the corresponding changes made 
regarding the related revisions, we are finalizing these amendments 
with changes from proposal so that Tables HH-3 and HH-4 are consistent 
with the finalized definition of final cover. We are not adding the 
term alternative final covers in area type A5 of Table HH-3 or in 
condition C2 of Table HH-4. The final revisions allow facilities with 
gas collection and approved final covers, whether traditional or 
alternative, to use the 95 percent collection efficiency in their 
emissions calculations.
    Comment: Waste Management Inc., the Petitioner for the Petition for 
Reconsideration (hereafter the ``Petitioner''), supported the EPA's 
proposed revisions to Table HH-4 in response to their petition. The 
Petitioner further acknowledged that this revision to Table HH-4 is 
meant ``to complete [the EPA's] response to'' the Petition for 
Reconsideration. In their comments, the Petitioner reiterated extensive 
explanation for the basis for these revisions and further requested 
that the EPA confirm in the preamble to the final rule ``that depth of 
cover is not the sole, or master variable for determining methane 
flux.'' The Petitioner also stated that ``the EPA should consider 
bolstering its decision to replace the 24-inch soil cover requirement 
with intermediate or interim soil cover, by more comprehensively 
describing the underlying literature when it finalizes the 2015 
Revisions.'' The Petitioner further stated that the ``EPA should more 
clearly state that the scientific record does not support 24 inches of 
soil cover as a reasonable and scientifically-sound prerequisite for 
use of the binned approach'' for oxidation fractions. Lastly, the 
Petitioner cited several perceived shortcomings in the memorandum 
prepared by RTI International (RTI Memo), in particular that only 27 of 
the 90 peer-reviewed studies were reviewed in response to the Petition 
for Reconsideration. The Petitioner stated that ``[t]herefore, the 
Agency should request that RTI revise its analysis to acknowledge that 
the scientific literature does not support cover depth as a primary 
factor influencing methane oxidation, and that two-thirds of the 
relevant measurements do not reference soil cover depths.''
    Other commenters similarly supported the revisions the EPA proposed 
to remove the 24-inch soil cover requirement and instead reference 
intermediate or interim cover requirements. However, the Agency also 
received comments stating that we should retain the minimum depth 
requirement of 24 inches of soil cover for the use of soil oxidation 
factors in excess of 10 percent. These commenters questioned the 
rationale for the EPA effectively ignoring the uncertainty of assuming 
that oxidation rates in 12 inches of soil cover will be equivalent to 
those reported in the studies where cover soils were at least 24 inches 
thick.
    Response: The EPA appreciates the comment submitted by the 
Petitioner in support of the proposed revisions to address their 
Petition for Reconsideration. As stated in section III.S.1.c, the EPA 
is completing its response to the Petition for Reconsideration through 
this final rulemaking. As stated in the preamble to the proposed rule 
(81 FR 2569), after reviewing the scientific literature on the methane 
oxidation, we determined that while the literature is not conclusive 
regarding the minimum soil cover necessary for oxidation to occur, it 
does show that oxidation generally occurs with at least 12 inches of 
soil cover. As described in the Findings section of the memorandum (81 
FR 2569, EPA Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526-0008) documenting the 
literature review that led to the proposed revisions (hereafter 
referred to as the RTI Memorandum) in 11 of the studies reviewed, most 
of the methane oxidation appears to occur in the top 12 to 15 inches of 
cover soil. Our review of state permitting requirements also found that 
most states require at least 12 inches of intermediate or interim soil 
cover. Therefore, if an active landfill is receiving waste, the 
landfill should be applying a minimum 12-inch soil cover as 
intermediate or interim cover. As

[[Page 89232]]

such, in the final amendments to Table HH-4 we are replacing the 24-
inch soil cover requirement with the requirement for interim or 
intermediate cover, and further provide that if the landfill is located 
in a state without requirements for interim or intermediate cover, the 
landfill must have a soil cover of 12 inches or greater in order to use 
one of the higher oxidation fraction values.
    We agree with the Petitioner's comment that the depth of soil cover 
is not the sole or ``master'' variable for determining methane flux and 
that not all studies reported the soil cover depth, but note that all 
studies included some amount of soil cover and maintain that some 
amount of soil cover is important for methane oxidation to occur. As 
noted in the RTI Memorandum, methane oxidation rates are influenced by 
a number of variables, including the flow velocity of the landfill gas, 
or methane flux, through the soil surface; the porosity of the soil 
layer; the number and types of microorganisms in the soil layer; and 
the soil surface temperature or moisture content. Upon receiving the 
Petition for Reconsideration, which challenged the cover depth 
requirement, we reviewed the peer-reviewed literature on landfill 
methane oxidation. As stated in the RTI Memorandum, all of the ninety 
studies included soil characteristic data, meaning that there was some 
soil cover in place at the landfills or simulated environments in these 
studies, and after reviewing these studies we concluded that some 
amount of soil cover is necessary for oxidation to occur. Having made 
that conclusion, we focused our review on those studies that reported a 
methane oxidation value and a soil cover depth, as not all studies 
included this granularity of detail, to attempt to inform the 
determination of the soil cover depth at which methane oxidation 
occurs. As stated above, the review did yield data to support that most 
of the methane oxidation appears to occur in the top 12 to 15 inches of 
cover soil, which also reaffirms our conclusion that soil cover is a 
necessary factor for methane oxidation to occur. For all the reasons 
discussed in this section, these revisions, which are our final action 
on the Petition, are intended to address the Petitioner's concerns and 
are based on the scientific literature and landfill practice as 
required by state permitting. We do not agree that the further 
revisions to the language or the supporting documents suggested by the 
Petitioner is warranted, or necessary to support our final amendments.
    With regard to the comments received stating that we should retain 
the minimum depth requirement of 24 inches of soil cover for the use of 
soil oxidation factors in excess of 10 percent, based on our review of 
the literature, and as stated above, the review of the scientific 
literature did not support a conclusion on the optimum depth of 24 
inches of soil cover for methane oxidation. The review did identify 
several studies describing that most of the methane oxidation appears 
to occur in the top 12 to 15 inches of cover soil, which corresponds to 
most state requirements for intermediate or interim cover. We therefore 
incorporated intermediate or interim soil cover to reference state 
requirements, and specify that, in the absence of state requirements 
regarding intermediate or interim soil cover, that there must be at 
least 12 inches of soil cover, as a way to ensure that adequate soil 
cover is present in order for the facility to use the higher oxidation 
values.
    Comment: Several commenters objected to the proposed revisions to 
Table HH-4 that would require landfills that have passive or active 
vents that service greater than 50 percent of the landfill area 
containing waste or that only have passive or active vents to use the 
default 10 percent oxidation fraction in their emissions calculations. 
Commenters described the situations in which passive and active vents 
are used in areas that are unable to produce enough gas to support an 
active gas collection and control system or an active flare. These 
vents help prevent gas build up that may cause cracks and fissures in 
the landfill cover. Commenters stated that the EPA's ``overly 
conservative'' methodology already accounts for any methane loss 
through vents. Commenters further stated that the studies EPA cited to 
support the proposed revision, Liptay et al. 1998 \20\ and Chanton et 
al. 2000,\21\ do not in fact ``measure emissions from vents, nor did 
they attempt to estimate the proportional impact of emissions from 
vents, relative to emissions moving through the surface of the 
landfill, and subject to oxidation in the cover.'' Commenters presented 
alternative measured findings from another study, Green et al 2012,\22\ 
which they claimed contradicted the rationale for EPA's proposal. 
Commenters also provided suggested language for Table HH-4 that address 
their concerns and provide clarity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Liptay et al. 1998. ``Use of stable isotopes to determine 
methane oxidation in landfill cover soils. Journal of Geophysical 
Research, 103:8243-8250.
    \21\ Chanton et al. 2000. Seasonal variation in methane 
oxidation in landfill cover soils as determined by an in situ stable 
isotope technique. Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 14:51-60.
    \22\ Green, R. et al. 2012. ``Measured and Modeled Methane 
Emissions at Closed MSW Landfills without Gas Collection,'' 
Proceedings of the Global Waste Management Symposium, San Antonio, 
Texas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Response: We agree with the commenters that the two studies 
identified in the memo entitled ``Review of Oxidation Studies and 
Associated Cover Depths in the Peer-Reviewed Literature,'' Docket Id. 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526-0008, do not sufficiently support the proposed 
revision to restrict the oxidation fractions that may be used by 
landfills that have only passive or active vents or for landfills with 
passive vents/passive flares that service greater than 50 percent of 
the landfill area containing waste. We also agree with the importance 
of the type of field studies noted by the commenters. However, we have 
not been able to identify additional studies in the peer-reviewed body 
of evidence supporting methane oxidation fractions higher than 10 
percent for landfills without gas collection and control systems that 
primarily vent their gases. We had hoped that with proposing this 
revision and soliciting comment on restricting the oxidation fractions 
for these landfills, we would receive information about studies that 
definitely support or refute such a proposal. Given the current lack of 
rigorous, scientifically based measurement data on methane oxidation 
for landfills meeting the criteria in C2 of Table HH-4, we are not 
finalizing the proposed revision to criteria C3 of Table HH-4: ``or for 
landfills with passive vents/passive flares that service greater than 
50 percent of the landfill area containing waste, or for landfills with 
only passive vents/passive flares or active venting.'' Should we 
identify studies that more clearly support restricting the oxidation 
fractions that may be used by landfills with only passive or active 
vents or with these vents over a majority of the landfill surface, we 
may consider proposing such a revision again in the future.
    In this final rule, we are also clarifying the descriptions in 
Table HH-4 for conditions C4, C5, C6, and C7 to state that ``For 
landfills that do not meet the conditions in C2 or C3 above . . .'' to 
make clear that if the landfill does not meet the final conditions of 
C2 or C3 (i.e., C2: Having a geomembrane cover of other non-soil 
barrier meeting the definition of final cover with less than 12 inches 
of soil cover for greater than 50 percent of the landfill area 
containing waste, and C3: Electing not to determine methane flux) then 
that landfill may use the oxidation fractions listed assuming the 
remainder of the

[[Page 89233]]

condition is met (i.e., the methane flux rate is of the amount 
specified in Table HH-4). These clarifying edits were suggested by the 
commenters, and after consideration, we agree that these related 
additional changes to Table HH-4 more clearly state which oxidation 
fraction may be used in calculating emissions depending upon conditions 
in place at the landfill. We agree that the text provided by 
commenters, in addition to what was proposed, provides even further 
clarity so that a landfill owner or operator can be certain as to which 
oxidation fraction is appropriate to use.
3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart HH Become Effective
    As shown in Table 3 of this preamble and consistent with the 
description of amendments in section I.E.1 of this preamble, all 
amendments to subpart HH will be effective on January 1, 2017, as 
proposed and will be reflected starting with RY2016 reports that are 
submitted in 2017. No comments were received on the timing of revisions 
to subpart HH.

T. Subpart II--Industrial Wastewater Treatment

    We are finalizing amendments to subpart II of Part 98 (Industrial 
Wastewater) as proposed. This section discusses the substantive 
revisions to subpart II; additional minor amendments, corrections, and 
clarifications, including a change to the final rule, are summarized in 
the Final Table of Revisions available in the docket for this 
rulemaking (Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526). We are also 
finalizing as proposed confidentiality determinations for new and 
revised data elements resulting from the revisions to subpart II; see 
section IV of this preamble and the memorandum ``Final Data Category 
Assignments and Confidentiality Determinations for Data Elements in the 
Proposed 2015 Revisions'' in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for 
additional information on the final category assignments and 
confidentiality determinations for these data elements. The EPA 
received no comments objecting to the proposed revisions to subpart II.
1. Revisions to Subpart II To Improve the Quality of Data Collected 
Under Part 98 and Improve the U.S. GHG Inventory
    The EPA is finalizing amendments to subpart II reporting 
requirements that will enhance the quality and accuracy of the data 
collected under the GHGRP, improve verification of collected data, and 
provide additional data to support estimates included in the U.S. GHG 
Inventory, while generally resulting in only a slight increase in 
burden for reporters. We are finalizing an amendment to 40 CFR 98.356 
to require facilities that perform ethanol production to indicate 
whether their facility uses a wet milling process or a dry milling 
process. To clarify this requirement, we are finalizing amendments to 
40 CFR 98.358 to add definitions of ``wet milling'' and ``dry 
milling.'' The EPA intends to use the data on the numbers of facilities 
with wet versus dry milling processes and their respective wastewater 
characteristics to improve the understanding of the data collected 
under the GHGRP, better understand trends in industrial wastewater 
technology for use in future policies and programs, update assumptions 
used in the U.S. GHG Inventory, and thereby improve the estimates of 
U.S. emissions from wastewater treatment at ethanol production 
facilities. In addition, the EPA intends to update the U.S. GHG 
Inventory using data on the level of biogas recovery in use at wet 
milling facilities and at dry milling facilities.
2. Other Amendments to Subpart II
    The EPA is also finalizing as proposed an amendment to 40 CFR 
98.358 to add a definition of the term ``weekly average.'' This 
amendment will serve to resolve uncertainties in the reporting 
requirements in 40 CFR 98.356(b)(1) and 40 CFR 98.356(d)(3) through (6) 
regarding how to calculate weekly averages for chemical oxygen demand 
(COD) and 5-day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) 
concentration, CH4 concentration, biogas temperature, biogas 
moisture content, and biogas pressure. This amendment will have no 
impact on burden for reporters.
3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart II Become Effective
    As shown in Table 4 of this preamble and consistent with the 
description of amendments in section I.E.2 of this preamble, all 
amendments to subpart II will be effective on January 1, 2018 as 
proposed and will be reflected starting with RY2017 reports that are 
submitted in 2018. No comments were received on the timing of revisions 
to subpart II.

U. Subpart LL--Suppliers of Coal-Based Liquid Fuels

    In this action, we are finalizing several amendments to subpart LL 
of Part 98 (Suppliers of Coal-based Liquid Fuels). This section 
discusses the substantive revisions to subpart LL; additional minor 
amendments, corrections, and clarifications are summarized in the Final 
Table of Revisions available in the docket for this rulemaking (Docket 
Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526). The EPA received no comments objecting 
to the proposed revisions to subpart LL.
    We are finalizing several revisions to 40 CFR part 98, subpart LL 
(Suppliers of Coal-based Liquid Fuels) to clarify requirements and 
amend data reporting requirements, resulting in a decrease in burden 
for reporters.
    As proposed, we are removing the requirements of 40 CFR 
98.386(a)(4), (8), and (15), (b)(4), and (c)(4) for each facility, 
importer, and exporter to report the annual quantity of each coal-based 
liquid fuel on the basis of the measurement method used. Reporters will 
continue to report the annual quantities of each coal-based liquid fuel 
in metric tons or barrels at 40 CFR 98.386(a)(2), (6), and (14), 
(b)(2), and (c)(2). We are also clarifying, as proposed, that the 
quantity of bulk natural gas liquids (NGLs) reported under 40 CFR 
98.386(a)(20) should not include NGLs already reported as individual 
products under 40 CFR 98.386(a)(2). These revisions not only clarify 
the reporting requirements, but also harmonize subpart LL requirements 
with those of subpart MM.
    As shown in Table 4 of this preamble and consistent with the 
description of amendments in section I.E.2 of this preamble, all 
amendments to subpart LL will be effective on January 1, 2018 as 
proposed and will be reflected starting with RY2017 reports that are 
submitted in 2018. No comments were received on the timing of revisions 
to subpart LL.

V. Subpart NN--Suppliers of Natural Gas and Natural Gas Liquids

    We are finalizing several amendments to subpart NN of Part 98 
(Suppliers of Natural Gas and Natural Gas Liquids). This section 
discusses the substantive revisions to subpart NN. Additional minor 
corrections, including corrections made for the first time in the final 
rule, are presented in the Table of 2015 Revisions (see Docket Id. No. 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526). We are also finalizing as proposed 
confidentiality determinations for new data elements resulting from the 
revisions to subpart NN; see section IV of this preamble and the 
memorandum ``Final Data Category Assignments and Confidentiality 
Determinations for Data Elements in the Proposed 2015 Revisions'' in 
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for additional information on the 
final category assignments and confidentiality determinations for these 
data elements.

[[Page 89234]]

    The EPA received one comment requesting clarification on the 
proposed revisions to subpart NN in the Table of 2015 Revisions; this 
comment has been addressed by implementing the change suggested by the 
commenter, along with other harmonizing changes. See the document 
``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for Data 
Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. No. 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart NN.
    We are finalizing one amendment to subpart NN that will improve the 
quality of the data collected under Part 98. We are adding a new 
reporting requirement at 40 CFR 98.406(b)(14), as proposed, to require 
local distribution companies (LDCs) to provide the name of the U.S. 
state or territory covered in the report. The EPA received no comments 
on this proposed revision.
    As shown in Table 4 of this preamble and consistent with the 
description of amendments in section I.E.2 of this preamble, all 
amendments to subpart NN will be effective on January 1, 2018 as 
proposed and will be reflected starting with RY2017 reports that are 
submitted in 2018. No comments were received on the timing of revisions 
to subpart NN.

W. Subpart OO--Suppliers of Industrial Greenhouse Gases

    We are finalizing all amendments to subpart OO of Part 98 
(Suppliers of Industrial Greenhouse Gases) as proposed. This section 
discusses all the revisions to subpart OO; additional minor 
clarifications, including minimal changes to the final rule, are 
summarized in the Final Table of Revisions available in the docket for 
this rulemaking (Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526). The EPA received 
several comments for subpart OO. We are also finalizing as proposed 
confidentiality determinations for new data elements resulting from the 
revisions to subpart OO; see section IV of this preamble and the 
memorandum ``Final Data Category Assignments and Confidentiality 
Determinations for Data Elements in the Proposed 2015 Revisions'' in 
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for additional information on the 
final category assignments and confidentiality determinations for these 
data elements. Substantive comments are addressed in section III.W.2 of 
this preamble; see the document ``Summary of Public Comments and 
Responses for Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: 2015 Revisions and 
Confidentiality Determinations for Data Elements under the Greenhouse 
Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a 
complete listing of all comments and responses related to subpart OO.
1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart OO
    This section discusses the substantive revisions to subpart OO to 
improve the quality of data collected under Part 98. We are finalizing 
all revisions to subpart OO as proposed. These revisions include two 
revisions to the definition of the source category to include (1) 
Facilities that destroy 25,000 mtCO2e or more of industrial 
GHGs and/or fluorinated heat transfer fluids annually, and (2) entities 
that produce, import, or export fluorinated heat transfer fluids that 
are not also fluorinated greenhouse gases. They also include an 
expansion of the scope of reporting to include production, 
transformation, destruction, imports and exports of heat transfer 
fluids that are not also fluorinated GHGs.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses on Subpart OO
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to the proposed amendments to subpart OO. See the document 
``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for Data 
Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. No 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart OO.
    Comment: One commenter disagreed with the EPA's proposed expansion 
of the definition of the source category and the scope of reporting. 
Regarding the proposed expansion of the scope of reporting to cover 
fluorinated heat transfer fluids that are not also fluorinated GHGs, 
the commenter asserted that the burden required to implement these 
changes was not ``modest,'' as had been stated by the EPA in the 
preamble to the proposed rule. The commenter agreed with the EPA that 
all suppliers of fluorinated HTFs that are not also fluorinated GHGs 
are believed to report under subpart OO already, and that these 
suppliers would need to report one to 12 additional compounds. However, 
the commenter argued that this would require ``significant additional 
activities,'' including additional monitoring, QA/QC, and 
recordkeeping.
    The commenter stated that the costs associated with the proposed 
subpart OO requirements account for 23 percent of the first year costs 
and 21 percent of the subsequent year costs for all subparts, other 
than subpart FF, affected by the proposed revisions. The commenter went 
on to argue that ``the minor impact of fluorinated HTFs, as compared to 
other fluorinated GHGs for which EPA currently requires reporting . . . 
does not justify the cost.'' The commenter urged the EPA to reconsider 
the proposed revision, but stated that if the EPA decided to require 
reporting of fluorinated HTFs, the EPA should apply these only to 
facilities with fluorinated HTF emissions above the 25,000-ton-
CO2-equivalent threshold.
    Regarding the proposed expansion of the definition of the source 
category to include facilities that destroy fluorinated GHGs or 
fluorinated HTFs, the commenter argued that the EPA should have a more 
rigorous rationale, supported by data, before undertaking this 
expansion. The commenter claimed that the EPA's justification for 
requiring destruction facilities to report their destruction relied on 
conjecture, quoting the proposed rule as saying that lack of 
information from destruction facilities ``may [commenter's emphasis] 
result in an underestimate'' of the quantities destroyed. The commenter 
recommended that the EPA undertake additional research to identify the 
potential number of destruction facilities and to estimate the 
potential quantity of industrial GHGs destroyed annually.
    Response: As explained in the preamble to the proposed rule, the 
EPA's goal in expanding the definition of the source category and scope 
of reporting under subpart OO is to ensure that the EPA has a more 
accurate understanding of the U.S. supplies of both fluorinated GHGs 
and fluorinated HTFs.
    Specifically, as stated in the preamble to the proposed rule, 
collecting information on the U.S. supply of fluorinated HTFs will 
enable us to compare reported supplies to the demand for fluorinated 
HTFs that we calculate based on the emissions (1) Reported under 
subpart I, and (2) estimated for electronics facilities that do not 
report under subpart I (e.g., because they fall below the threshold). 
Also as stated in the proposed rule, similar comparisons for other 
fluorinated compounds (e.g., SF6) have alerted the EPA to 
potential underestimates of emissions. Such potential errors are of 
particular concern for fluorinated heat transfer fluids, many of which 
are fully fluorinated

[[Page 89235]]

compounds with atmospheric lifetimes of thousands of years and GWPs 
near 10,000.
    The commenter claimed that the impact of fluorinated HTFs that are 
not fluorinated GHGs does not justify the cost of reporting them under 
subpart OO, which the commenter asserted was ``not modest.'' The 
commenter argued that the estimated costs of the revisions to subpart 
OO comprised a significant percentage of the total costs of the entire 
revisions rule, excluding the costs of the revisions to subpart FF. 
However, as detailed in the economic analysis for the proposed 
rule,\23\ only a small fraction of the costs of the revisions to 
subpart OO cited by the commenter consist of the costs associated with 
requiring reporting of fluorinated heat transfer fluids that are not 
also fluorinated GHGs. Specifically, for facilities reporting their 
production, imports, exports, transformation, and destruction of 
fluorinated HTFs that are not also fluorinated GHGs, the EPA estimated 
per-facility costs to be $132 in $2011 ($146 in $2014) for the first 
and subsequent years. The EPA estimated that a total of three 
facilities would incur these costs, leading to total annual costs of 
$397 in $2011 ($438 in $2014) from the reporting of fluorinated HTFs 
that are not also fluorinated GHGs.\24\ We consider these costs to be 
well justified by the insight gained into supplies and emissions of 
potent and long-lived fluorinated HTFs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ ``Assessment of Burden Impacts of 2015 Revisions to the 
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'', Docket Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526-
0015.
    \24\ EPA estimated the total cost of the revisions to subpart 
OO, across all subpart OO reporters, to be $36,787 in $2011 in the 
first year ($38,502 in $2014) and $27,194 in $2011 in subsequent 
years ($29,138 in $2014). Most of this total is accounted for by the 
eight facilities that EPA estimated would be reporting destruction 
of F-GHGs and F-HTFs for the first time. For these facilities, the 
per-facility costs were estimated to be $4,527 and $3,327 in $2011 
($4,813 and $3,642 in $2014) for the first and subsequent years 
respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The commenter did not offer any justification for establishing a 
separate threshold for reporting supplies of fluorinated HTFs that are 
not also fluorinated GHGs, and we are not establishing a separate 
threshold in this final rule. As noted in the preamble to the proposed 
rule, the thresholds for industrial GHG suppliers consist of no 
threshold for producers, and thresholds for importers and exporters of 
25,000 mtCO2e, summed across CO2, N2O, 
and all fluorinated GHGs. Importers and exporters who exceed the 
threshold have been required to report their imports and exports of all 
of these GHGs, as applicable. (Note that CO2 supplies are 
reported under subpart PP.) Including fluorinated HTFs that are not 
also fluorinated GHGs in this total, and in the corresponding reporting 
requirements, is consistent with the GHGRP's long-established approach 
to reporting of industrial GHG supplies as well as other GHG-related 
supplies.
    Regarding the expansion of the definition of the industrial gas 
suppliers source category to include facilities that destroy 
fluorinated GHGs and fluorinated HTFs, we believe that the rationale 
provided in the preamble to the proposed rule is sufficient to support 
the revision. As explained there, because the previous definition of 
the source category excluded entities that destroyed but did not 
produce, import, or export fluorinated GHGs, significant amounts of 
destruction of fluorinated GHGs may not have been reported, resulting 
in an overestimate of the fluorinated GHG supply. We noted that the 
fluorinated GHG market includes participants who neither produce nor 
import industrial GHGs but who may destroy them or send them off site 
for destruction. For example, these participants include free-standing 
destruction facilities and refrigerant reclaimers who clean used HFCs 
for reuse. We also cited the destruction market for ozone-depleting 
substances (ODS), which are chemically similar to fluorinated GHGs, are 
manufactured and imported by many of the same facilities and companies 
that manufacture and import fluorinated GHGs, and are used in many of 
the same applications as fluorinated GHGs. Based on reporting by ODS 
destruction facilities to the EPA under the Stratospheric Protection 
Program, we observed that this market includes multiple hazardous waste 
treatment facilities that use a variety of different destruction 
technologies to destroy significant quantities of ODS. We concluded 
that five to 10 of these facilities (or similar facilities) would be 
required to report their destruction of fluorinated GHGs and HTFs given 
the expansion of the definition of the industrial gas supplier source 
category and the application of the 25,000-mtCO2e threshold 
for facilities that do not also produce fluorinated GHGs. Based on this 
analysis, we believe that the cost of reporting by fluorinated GHG 
destruction facilities will be justified by its benefits.
    Finally, we note that because the purpose of the expanded 
definition of the source category is to gather information on the 
quantities of fluorinated GHGs destroyed, it is not reasonable to 
expect a precise estimate of these quantities before the expanded 
definition goes into effect.
3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart OO Become Effective
    As shown in Table 4 of this preamble and consistent with the 
description of amendments in section I.E.2 of this preamble, all 
amendments to subpart OO will be effective on January 1, 2018 as 
proposed and will be reflected starting with RY2018 reports that are 
submitted in 2019. The amendments to subpart OO require new facilities 
to report to the GHGRP. We are making these revisions effective January 
1, 2018 so that the new reporters will take the necessary action to 
begin monitoring to be in full compliance with these revisions 
throughout 2018. The corresponding revisions to Table A-5 of subpart A, 
which serve to add these new facilities under subpart OO, will also be 
effective on January 1, 2018 and will be reflected in RY2018 reports. 
No comments were received on the timing of revisions to subpart OO or 
the corresponding revision to Table A-5.

X. Subpart PP--Suppliers of Carbon Dioxide

    We are finalizing as proposed one minor correction to subpart PP of 
Part 98 (Suppliers of Carbon Dioxide). This minor revision is 
summarized in the Final Table of Revisions available in the docket for 
this rulemaking (Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526).
    The EPA received three comments on subpart PP. These include 
substantive comments regarding the proposed confidentiality 
determinations for certain data reporting elements of subpart PP for 
which no determination had been previously established, which are 
addressed in section IV.C of this preamble. See the document ``Summary 
of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: 
2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for Data Elements 
under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and responses related 
to subpart PP.
    As shown in Table 4 of this preamble and consistent with the 
description of amendments in section I.E.2 of this preamble, the 
amendments to subpart PP will be effective on January 1, 2018 as 
proposed and will be reflected starting with RY2017 reports that are 
submitted in 2018. No comments were received on the timing of revisions 
to subpart PP.

Y. Subpart RR--Geologic Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide

    No substantive amendments to subpart RR of Part 98 (Geologic

[[Page 89236]]

Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide) are being finalized for this 
rulemaking. The EPA had proposed to add a data reporting element to 40 
CFR 98.446 to require reporters to indicate whether the facility is 
injecting a CO2 stream in subsurface geologic formations to 
enhance the recovery of oil or natural gas. The purpose of this 
proposed data element was linked to our proposed development of 
categorical confidentiality determinations for subpart RR data elements 
for which confidentiality is currently evaluated on a case-by-case 
basis (77 FR 48072, 48081 through 48083; August 13, 2012). The EPA is 
not finalizing the proposed subpart RR confidentiality determinations 
at this time; see section IV of this preamble for additional 
information. Therefore, the EPA is not finalizing the proposed data 
reporting element. See the document ``Summary of Public Comments and 
Responses for Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: 2015 Revisions and 
Confidentiality Determinations for Data Elements under the Greenhouse 
Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a 
complete listing of all comments and responses related to subpart RR.

Z. Subpart TT--Industrial Waste Landfills

    In this action, we are finalizing several amendments to Table TT-1 
to subpart TT of Part 98 (Industrial Waste Landfills). This section 
discusses the substantive revisions to Table TT-1; one minor correction 
is summarized in the Final Table of Revisions available in the Docket 
for this rulemaking (Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526).
    The EPA received several comments for subpart TT. Substantive 
comments are addressed in section III.Z.2 of this preamble; see the 
document ``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas 
Reporting Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for 
Data Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart TT.
1. Revisions to Subpart TT To Improve the Quality of Data Collected 
Under Part 98
    In this action, the EPA is finalizing as proposed amendments to 
Table TT-1 to subpart TT to create four separate categories of pulp and 
paper waste types and degradable organic carbon (DOC) values for boiler 
ash, kraft recovery (causticizing) wastes, wastewater treatment 
sludges, and other (which includes hydropulper rejects, bark wastes, 
and digester knots). We are also finalizing as proposed a footnote to 
Table TT-1 explaining what is meant by kraft recovery waste. These 
separate categories and corresponding DOC values allow for more 
accurate methane generation calculations for industrial waste landfills 
at pulp and paper manufacturing facilities that segregate their waste 
streams. After consideration of public comments, we are retaining the 
waste category in Table TT-1 for general pulp and paper manufacturing 
wastes that we had proposed to remove. However, we are assigning a 
corresponding DOC value of 0.15 instead of the previous value of 0.20 
for this waste type. As described in further detail below at section 
III.Z.2., this additional category to the four proposed and finalized 
categories provides an appropriate DOC value for use by industrial 
waste landfills at pulp and paper facilities that do not segregate 
their waste into separate streams, except to account for industrial 
sludge, and general industrial waste facilities that accept waste from 
multiple industries that may be unable to report separate pulp and 
paper manufacturing waste streams. Additionally, reporters that accept 
waste streams from different industries should be able to track waste 
streams by industrial source and therefore quantify industrial waste 
received from different industries. Without retaining this fifth 
category, these reporters would no longer have been able to accurately 
calculate methane generation from their facility with the proposed DOC 
values, which is not what we intended; therefore, the fifth waste 
category is needed to allow proper calculations to be performed.
    Additionally, we explained at proposal that we intended to require 
the pulp and paper industry to use the industry-specific wastewater 
sludge default DOC value, and had proposed to revise the ``Industrial 
Sludge'' category to be ``Industrial Sludge (other than pulp and paper 
industry sludge).'' Consistent with this proposed revision, we are 
further clarifying instead in a footnote to the Industrial Sludge 
portion of Table TT-1 that if a facility can segregate out sludge from 
the pulp and paper industry from other sludge received, a DOC value of 
0.12 must be applied to that portion of the sludge, instead of the 
general 0.09 industrial sludge value. This specificity is intended to 
ensure more accurate calculation of methane generation at industrial 
waste landfills.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses on Subpart TT
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to the proposed amendments to subpart TT. See the document 
``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for Data 
Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' in Docket Id. No. 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart TT.
    Comment: Two commenters were pleased with the EPA's proposal to use 
default DOC values for the four specific pulp and paper industry waste 
types and agreed with the proposed values of 0.06 for boiler ash, 0.025 
for kraft recovery wastes, 0.12 for pulp and paper wastewater treatment 
sludge, and 0.20 for ``other pulp and paper wastes.'' These commenters 
also recommended an additional default DOC category and value for 
``pulp and paper manufacturing wastes, general'' in Table TT-1, with an 
assigned DOC value of 0.10 (wet basis), stating that this category and 
value could be used by pulp and paper manufacturing facilities that do 
not segregate their wastes into separate streams. The commenters stated 
that the value of 0.10 is the weighted average of the waste stream-
specific DOC values reported to the GHGRP for subpart TT by pulp and 
paper facilities in 2013, and is therefore appropriate for estimating 
industrial landfill methane emissions from general pulp and paper 
manufacturing wastes. One of the commenters cited a memorandum from RTI 
International to the EPA in support of modifications to the pulp and 
paper DOC value for the Waste Chapter of the U.S. GHG Inventory (please 
see the memorandum titled ``Investigate the potential to update DOC and 
k values for the Pulp and Paper industry in the US Solid Waste 
Inventory'' in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526) as support for this 
0.10 value. The commenters also stated that the EPA should not preclude 
this general option for pulp and paper mills that, for whatever reason, 
find it more appropriate to report their waste DOC values in the 
aggregate.
    Response: The EPA agrees that a general category and corresponding 
DOC value should be retained in Table TT-1 for pulp and paper 
manufacturing wastes so that industrial landfills at pulp and paper 
manufacturing facilities that do not segregate their waste into 
separate streams, except to account for industrial sludge, can more 
accurately

[[Page 89237]]

calculate methane generation than what would have been allowed in the 
proposed rule. While we agree that the value should be lower than the 
0.20 in Table TT-1, the analysis in the memo cited by the commenter 
shows that the value for general waste from pulp and paper 
manufacturing facilities should be 0.15, accounting for all values 
reported for all waste streams at pulp and paper facilities, except for 
industrial sludge, at pulp and paper facilities. A lower DOC value of 
0.10 can be calculated when considering only the 21 out of 76 pulp and 
paper facilities that provided waste-stream-specific DOC values in 
their 2013 annual reports, but there is still uncertainty behind the 
types and quantities of waste streams disposed of in dedicated pulp and 
paper industrial waste landfills and we cannot exclude the reporters 
that are unable to report waste stream specific data. Therefore, when 
we calculate a value that is to be used for general pulp and paper 
waste we need to include the entire universe of available data from 
reporters at pulp and paper manufacturing facilities (76 in total) 
including those that use default values. Additionally, the DOC value of 
0.15 for general pulp and paper manufacturing waste (other than 
industrial sludge) also corresponds with the DOC value of 0.16 as 
presented in Heath et al. (2010) \25\ for general pulp and paper 
manufacturing waste. Therefore, the final DOC value for pulp and paper 
manufacturing wastes is supported by our analysis of the best available 
information at this time. We may re-assess waste-stream specific data 
and how they impact the DOC value assigned for general pulp and paper 
waste (other than industrial sludge) in future reporting years as 
additional facilities choose to perform waste stream-specific analyses 
or choose to report using the pulp and paper waste-type specific DOC 
values.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ Heath, L.S. et al. 2010. Greenhouse Gas and Carbon Profile 
of the U.S. Forest Products Industry Value Chain. Environmental 
Science and Technology 44(2010) 3999-4005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. When the Final Amendments to Subpart TT Become Effective
    As shown in Table 4 of this preamble and consistent with the 
description of amendments in section I.E.2 of this preamble, all 
amendments to subpart TT will be effective on January 1, 2018, as 
proposed and will be reflected starting with RY2017 reports that are 
submitted in 2018. No comments were received on the timing of revisions 
to subpart TT.

AA. Other Minor Revisions, Clarifications, and Corrections

    In addition to the substantive amendments in sections III.A through 
III.Z of this preamble, we are finalizing minor revisions, 
clarifications, and corrections to subparts P, U, MM, and UU of Part 98 
as proposed. The EPA received no comments objecting to the proposed 
revisions to subparts P (Hydrogen Production), U (Miscellaneous Use of 
Carbonate), MM (Suppliers of Petroleum Products), and UU (Injection of 
Carbon Dioxide).
    The final revisions to these subparts are provided in the Final 
Table of Revisions for this rulemaking, available in Docket Id. No. 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526, and include clarifying requirements to better 
reflect the EPA's intent, corrections to calculation terms or cross-
references that do not revise the output of calculations, harmonizing 
changes within a subpart (such as changes to terminology), corrections 
to simple typographical errors, and other minor corrections (e.g., 
removal of redundant text).
    As shown in Table 4 of this preamble and consistent with the 
description of amendments in section I.E.2 of this preamble, all 
amendments to subparts U, MM, and UU will be effective on January 1, 
2018 as proposed and will be reflected starting with RY2017 reports 
that are submitted in 2018. No comments were received on the timing of 
revisions to these subparts.
    The EPA received one comment on our proposed implementation 
schedule for subpart P (Hydrogen Production). We had proposed that 
amendments to subpart P would be effective for RY2017. The commenter 
requested an additional year before implementation of the proposed 
``additional requirements'' in 40 CFR 98.164 for calibration of fuel 
flow meters, based on the premise that additional time would be needed 
because facilities would need to shut down operations to implement 
these new requirements (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526-0044). 
The proposed revisions were intended to be a clarification of the 
existing calibration requirements for fuel flow meters. The EPA 
originally intended that feedstock flow measurements be made with the 
same accuracy as the fuel flow measurements, and we have never intended 
for reporters to conclude that there were no monitoring or quality 
assurance requirements for the fuel flow. The pre-existing calculation 
methodology in subpart P clearly indicates that flow rate measurements 
for both fuels and feedstocks are required, and the calibration 
requirement in 40 CFR 98.164(b)(1) indicates that feedstock flow meters 
must meet the same requirements as fuel flow meters used under the Tier 
3 methodology in 40 CFR part 60, subpart C. However, it is apparent 
from the comment received that some reporters under subpart P have 
interpreted subpart P as not requiring monitoring or QA for the fuel 
flow. Though we expect all facilities currently have a flow meter on 
the fuel line, we understand from this comment that it is possible that 
a few reporters will need to upgrade their flow monitoring system to 
meet the requirements as clarified in this action. As such, we are 
postponing until January 1, 2018, the effective date for this amendment 
to subpart P to allow these revisions to be coordinated with 
facilities' planned downtime schedules.
    All other amendments to subpart P are effective on January 1, 2019 
as shown in Table 5 of this preamble and are consistent with the 
description of amendments effective on that date in section I.E.3 of 
this preamble. Although some amendments to subpart P are effective 
January 1, 2018 and some are effective January 1, 2019, all amendments 
to subpart P will be reflected in RY2018 reports that are submitted in 
2019 as shown in Tables 4 and 5 of this preamble.
    See the document ``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for 
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality 
Determinations for Data Elements under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Rule'' in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526 for a complete listing of 
all comments and responses related to subparts P, U, MM, and UU.

IV. Final Confidentiality Determinations for New or Substantially 
Revised Data Reporting Elements or Other Part 98 Reporting Elements for 
Which No Determination Has Been Previously Established

    This section provides a summary of the EPA's final confidentiality 
determinations for new and substantially revised data elements, certain 
existing Part 98 data elements for which no determination has been 
previously established, and the significant comments and responses 
related to the proposed confidentiality determinations for these data 
elements. Section IV.A of this preamble addresses commenters' concerns 
with the EPA's format for proposing and finalizing categorical 
confidentiality determinations for new or substantially revised data 
reporting elements assigned to data categories with categorical 
confidentiality determinations. Section

[[Page 89238]]

IV.B of this preamble addresses the EPA's final confidentiality 
determinations for all new or substantially revised data reporting 
elements. Section IV.C of this preamble addresses the EPA's final 
confidentiality determinations for certain existing Part 98 data 
reporting elements for which no determination has been previously 
established.
    The EPA also proposed to revise the confidentiality determinations 
for two existing data elements in subpart NN for which the 
confidentiality determinations had previously been established. The EPA 
received no comments on the proposed revised confidentiality 
determinations for subpart NN, and is finalizing the confidentiality 
determinations as proposed. For additional information and rationale 
for the confidentiality determinations for these data elements, see the 
preamble to the proposed rule (81 FR 2593, January 15, 2016).
    The EPA's comment response document in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2015-0526 provides a complete listing of all comments related to these 
topics and the EPA's responses.

A. EPA's Format for Proposing and Finalizing Categorical 
Confidentiality Determinations for New or Substantially Revised Data 
Reporting Elements Assigned to Data Categories With Categorical 
Confidentiality Determinations

    This section addresses the format used by the EPA for proposing 
categorical confidentiality determinations for new or substantially 
revised data reporting elements assigned to data categories with 
categorical confidentiality determinations. In the preamble to the 
proposed rule, we referenced the memorandum titled ``Proposed Data 
Category Assignments and Confidentiality Determinations for Data 
Elements in the Proposed 2015 Revisions'' in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2015-0526 for a list of the proposed new, substantially revised, and 
existing data elements, their proposed category assignments, and their 
proposed confidentiality determinations. This memorandum included 
proposed confidentiality determinations for all data elements, 
including data elements assigned to data categories with categorical 
confidentiality determinations that were not further discussed in the 
preamble.
    Three commenters questioned this format for proposing 
confidentiality determinations for certain new and substantially 
revised data reporting elements included in the proposed rule, and 
expressed confusion over whether the EPA had adequately proposed 
confidentiality determinations for these data elements, which were 
assigned to data categories with categorical confidentiality 
determinations. Specifically, commenters argued that the EPA failed to 
propose confidentiality determinations for the new and substantially 
revised data elements assigned to data categories with categorical 
confidentiality determinations, because the proposed determinations 
were not located in the preamble. One commenter contended that the EPA 
must re-propose these confidentiality determinations in order to 
provide an opportunity for public comment, as required under the 
Administrative Procedure Act. The commenters were concerned that the 
EPA would not be able to afford CBI protection for proposed new 
reporting elements in subpart CC (40 CFR 98.296(a)(1) and (b)(5)) and 
subpart O, even though the EPA had indicated in the supporting 
memorandum that we had determined that these data should be handled as 
CBI.
    We disagree with the comment that the EPA failed to propose 
confidentiality determinations for the new and substantially revised 
data elements assigned to data categories with categorical 
confidentiality determinations. In the proposed rule, the EPA stated 
that it was applying the same approach as previously used for making 
confidentiality determinations for data elements reported under the 
GHGRP, which consisted of assigning data elements to an appropriate 
data category and then either assigning the previously determined 
category-based confidentiality determination or making an individual 
determination if the data element is assigned to a category for which 
no category-based determination was previously made (see 81 FR 2574, 
January 15, 2016). Refer to section IV.B of the preamble to the 
proposed rule for further discussion of this approach, which was 
finalized in a previous rulemaking (76 FR 30782, May 26, 2011). The EPA 
clarified that ``[t]he data categories used were those finalized in the 
2012 CBI Rule,'' which included final confidentiality determinations on 
a categorical basis for a number of these data categories. Id. Using 
this approach, we stated in section IV.C of the preamble to the 
proposed amendments ``the EPA is proposing to assign each of the 117 
new or substantially revised data reporting requirements to the 
appropriate direct emitter or supplier data category'' (see 81 FR 
2575). For new and substantially revised reporting elements assigned to 
data categories without a categorical determination, we proposed 
confidentiality determinations. However, for data elements proposed to 
be assigned to a data category with a ``previously determined category-
based confidentiality determination,'' we referred the reader to the 
supporting memorandum for the proposed confidentiality determinations: 
``Proposed Data Category Assignments and Confidentiality Determinations 
for Data Elements in the Proposed 2015 Revisions, available in Docket 
Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526.'' (81 FR 2575). In that memorandum, the 
EPA identified the data categories and their established category-based 
confidentiality determinations. The memorandum shows the proposed 
categorical assignment for each of the data elements at issue. Using 
this format, the EPA proposed confidentiality determinations for those 
data elements proposed to be assigned to a data category with a 
categorical determination. The EPA has previously used this format 
(i.e., locating in a memorandum EPA's proposed confidentiality 
determinations for data elements assigned to data categories with 
categorical confidentiality determinations) to propose confidentiality 
determinations in prior rulemakings, as in the November 29, 2013 
revisions proposal (78 FR 71904). As in previous rulemakings that used 
the same format, the EPA specifically requested comment on the proposed 
category assignments and confidentiality determinations. In light of 
the detailed information that the EPA provided in the proposed rule 
regarding its approach for making confidentiality determinations and 
the resulting determinations, the EPA disagrees with the comment that 
the EPA failed to propose confidentiality determinations for the new 
and substantially revised data elements assigned to data categories 
with categorical confidentiality determinations. With respect to the 
Administrative Procedure Act, the notice and opportunity for comment 
described above are consistent with the rulemaking requirements of that 
statute. This rule is promulgated pursuant to section 307(d) of the 
Clean Air Act. The actions described above and the inclusion in the 
docket of the supporting memorandum are consistent with the 
requirements for proposed rules in section 307(d)(3) of the Clean Air 
Act.
    Regarding the commenters' concern specifically about the EPA's 
handling of new data elements in subpart O that the EPA proposed to be 
CBI, the EPA is

[[Page 89239]]

finalizing the determinations as proposed, as the EPA did not receive 
adverse comment on the proposed determinations. Regarding commenters' 
concerns about the specific data elements in subpart CC (40 CFR 
98.296(a)(1) and (b)(5)), the EPA is not finalizing the addition of 
these data elements, as discussed in section III.P of this preamble.

B. Final Confidentiality Determinations for New or Substantially 
Revised Data Reporting Elements

1. Summary of Final Confidentiality Determinations
    The EPA is finalizing the confidentiality determinations for new or 
substantially revised data reporting elements as they were proposed for 
all subparts except subparts A (General Provisions), I (Electronics 
Manufacturing), S (Lime Manufacturing), X (Petrochemical Production), 
CC (Soda Ash Manufacturing), DD (Electrical Transmission and 
Distribution Equipment Use), FF (Underground Coal Mines), HH (Municipal 
Solid Waste Landfills), and RR (Geologic Sequestration of Carbon 
Dioxide). For all subparts except subparts A, I, S, X, CC, DD, FF, HH, 
and RR, please refer to the preamble to the proposed rule (81 FR 2574; 
January 15, 2016) for additional information regarding the proposed 
confidentiality determinations.
    For subparts I, CC, DD, FF, HH, and RR, the EPA is not finalizing 
the proposed confidentiality determinations for certain data elements 
because the EPA is not finalizing the requirement to report these data 
elements (see sections III.F, III.P, III.Q, III.R, III.S, and III.Y of 
this preamble for additional information.) These data elements are:
     Three data elements under subpart I (proposed 40 CFR 
98.96(y)(2)(iv): The film type being manufactured, substrate type, and 
linewidth or technology node for any utilization, by-product formation 
rate, and/or destruction or removal efficiency data submitted).
     Two data elements under subpart CC (proposed 98.296(a)(1) 
and (b)(5): Annual consumption of trona or liquid alkaline feedstock).
     One data element under subpart DD (proposed 40 CFR 
98.306(m): Total miles of transmission and distribution lines located 
within each state or territory).
     One data element under subpart FF (proposed 40 CFR 
98.326(u): Annual coal production).
     One data element under subpart HH (proposed 40 CFR 
98.346(i)(7): An indication of whether the gas collection efficiency 
was determined on an area-weighted average basis or a volume-weighted 
average basis).
     One data element under RR (proposed 40 CFR 98.446(g): 
Whether the CO2 stream is being injected in subsurface 
geologic formations to enhance the recovery of oil or natural gas).
    The EPA is finalizing a confidentiality determination for one new 
data element for subpart FF resulting from changes from the proposed 
rule to this final rule. As discussed in section III.R of this 
preamble, which describes revisions to subpart FF, in lieu of 
eliminating the use of MSHA quarterly inspection reports as a source 
for data for monitoring methane liberated from ventilation systems, we 
are finalizing an amendment to 40 CFR 98.326(a) to require each mine 
relying on data obtained from MSHA to include, as attachments to its 
GHGRP report, the MSHA reports it relied upon to complete the GHGRP 
report. Given that the MSHA reports are the basis of a calculation 
method and will be used to determine whether a reporter selected the 
correct inputs for a GHG emission calculation, we consider these 
reports to be ``emissions data'' under 40 CFR 2.301(a)(2) because they 
contain ``information necessary to determine * * * the amount'' of an 
emission emitted by the source. We are therefore assigning this data 
element to the Calculation Methodology and Methodological Tier Category 
and apply the categorical determination of emissions data (not CBI) for 
that data category to this final data element. As emission data, these 
reports do not qualify for confidential treatment under section 114 of 
the CAA. In any event, although MSHA does not publish these reports 
directly, they have previously indicated that they do not consider the 
reports to be sensitive and would likely release them in response to a 
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.\26\ Data from these reports 
are also provided to the EPA for the U.S. Greenhouse Gas Inventory, and 
are also published in part through reports produced by EPA's Coalbed 
Methane Outreach Program.\27\ Further, the EPA has previously concluded 
that there is no potential disclosure concern with respect to certain 
data referenced in these reports.\28\ Those data are being reported 
under 40 CFR 98.326(a), (f), and (g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See ``Summary of Evaluation of Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Program (GHGRP) Part 98 ``Inputs to Emission Equations'' Data 
Elements Deferred Until 2013'' Memorandum, December 17, 2012. 
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2015-0526.
    \27\ See, e.g., ``U.S. Underground Coal Mine Ventilation Air 
Methane Exhaust Characterization'' (July 2010) and ``Identifying 
Opportunities for Methane Recovery at U.S. Coal Mines: Profiles of 
Selected Gassy Underground Coal Mines 2002-2006,'' available in the 
docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526.
    \28\ See ``Summary of Evaluation of Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Program (GHGRP) Part 98 ``Inputs to Emission Equations'' Data 
Elements Deferred Until 2013'' Memorandum, December 17, 2012. 
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2015-0526.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to this new data element, there are 13 data elements in 
subparts A, I, S, X, and DD that have been clarified or minimally 
revised since proposal, although the same information will be 
collected. These data elements and how they have been clarified in the 
final rule are listed in the following table. Because the information 
to be collected has not changed since proposal, we are finalizing the 
proposed confidentiality determinations for these data elements as 
proposed (see Table 6 of this preamble). For additional information on 
the rationale for the confidentiality determinations for these data 
elements, see the preamble to the proposed rule (81 FR 2574; January 
15, 2016) and the memorandum ``Proposed Data Category Assignments and 
Confidentiality Determinations for Data Elements in the Proposed 2015 
Revisions'' in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526. As discussed in 
section IV.A of this preamble, the EPA applied the same approach 
previously used for making confidentiality determinations for data 
elements reported under the GHGRP by assigning data elements to an 
appropriate data category and then assigning the previously determined 
categorical confidentiality determination or making an individual case-
by-case determination if the data element was assigned to a category 
for which no category-based determination was previously made.

[[Page 89240]]

   Table 6--Data Elements (With Technical or Clarifying Revisions Since Proposal, but No Change in Data To Be
                 Reported) and Their Final Category Assignment and Confidentiality Determination
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Final data  category
                                            assignment and            Data element             Data element
   Subpart  and citation  (40 CFR)         confidentiality          description, as          description, as
                                            determination               proposed                finalized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart A (General Provisions):        Facility and Unit        If one or more           If one or more
 98.2(i)(3) (proposed); 98.2(i)(3)      Identifier Information   processes or             processes or
 (finalized).                           (categorical             operations at a          operations at a
                                        determination as         facility or supplier     facility or supplier
                                        established in 2011:     cease to operate, but    cease to operate, but
                                        Emission data).          not all applicable       not all applicable
                                                                 processes or             processes or
                                                                 operations cease to      operations cease to
                                                                 operate, a               operate, a
                                                                 notification to the      notification to the
                                                                 Administrator that       Administrator that
                                                                 announces the            announces the
                                                                 cessation of reporting   cessation of reporting
                                                                 for the process or       for the process or
                                                                 operation no later       operation no later
                                                                 than March 31 of the     than March 31
                                                                 year following such      following the first
                                                                 changes.                 reporting year in
                                                                                          which the process or
                                                                                          operation has ceased
                                                                                          for an entire
                                                                                          reporting year.
Subpart A (General Provisions):        Facility and Unit        If the operations of a   If the operations of a
 98.2(i)(5) (proposed); 98.2(i)(5)      Identifier Information   facility or supplier     facility or supplier
 (finalized).                           (categorical             are changed such that    are changed such that
                                        determination as         a process or operation   a process or operation
                                        established in 2011:     no longer meets the      no longer meets the
                                        Emission data).          ``Definition of Source   ``Definition of Source
                                                                 Category'' as            Category'' as
                                                                 specified in an          specified in an
                                                                 applicable subpart, a    applicable subpart and
                                                                 notification to the      the owner or operator
                                                                 Administrator that       discontinues complying
                                                                 announces the            with any such subpart
                                                                 cessation of reporting   for the reporting
                                                                 no later than March 31   years following the
                                                                 of the year following    year in which change
                                                                 such changes.            occurs, a notification
                                                                                          to the Administrator
                                                                                          that announces the
                                                                                          cessation of reporting
                                                                                          for the process or
                                                                                          operation no later
                                                                                          than March 31
                                                                                          following the first
                                                                                          reporting year in
                                                                                          which such changes
                                                                                          persist for an entire
                                                                                          reporting year.
Subpart I (Electronics                 Emissions Data           The report must include  The report must include
 Manufacturing): 98.96(y)(2)(iv)        (categorical             the information          the information
 (proposed); 98.96(y)(2)(iv)            determination as         described in             described in
 (finalized).                           established in 2011:     paragraphs (y)(2)(i)     paragraphs (y)(2)(i)
                                        Emission data).          through (v) of this      through (v) of this
                                                                 section. (iv) . . .      section. (iv) . . .
                                                                 For any utilization,     For any utilization,
                                                                 by-product formation     by-product formation
                                                                 rate, and/or             rate, and/or
                                                                 destruction or removal   destruction or removal
                                                                 efficiency data          efficiency data
                                                                 submitted, the report    submitted, the report
                                                                 must describe, where     must include: The
                                                                 available, the:          methods used for the
                                                                 Methods used for the     measurements.
                                                                 measurements.
Subpart I (Electronics                 Unit/Process Static      The report must include  The report must include
 Manufacturing): 98.96(y)(2)(iv)        Characteristics That     the information          the information
 (proposed); 98.96(y)(2)(iv)            are Not Inputs to        described in             described in
 (finalized).                           Emission Equations;      paragraphs (y)(2)(i)     paragraphs (y)(2)(i)
                                        (categorical             through (v) of this      through (v) of this
                                        determination as         section. (iv) . . .      section. (iv) . . .
                                        established in 2011:     For any utilization,     For any utilization or
                                        Not emission data;       by-product formation     by-product formation
                                        case-by-case             rate, and/or             rate data submitted,
                                        determination: Not       destruction or removal   the report must
                                        CBI).                    efficiency data          include: The wafer
                                                                 submitted, the report    size.
                                                                 must describe, where
                                                                 available: The wafer
                                                                 size.
Subpart I (Electronics                 Emissions Data           The report must include  The report must include
 Manufacturing): 98.96(y)(2)(iv)        (categorical             the information          the information
 (proposed); 98.96(y)(2)(iv)            determination as         described in             described in
 (finalized).                           established in 2011:     paragraphs (y)(2)(i)     paragraphs (y)(2)(i)
                                        Emission data).          through (v) of this      through (v) of this
                                                                 section. (iv) . . .      section. (iv) . . .
                                                                 For any utilization,     For any utilization or
                                                                 by-product formation     by-product formation
                                                                 rate, and/or             rate data submitted,
                                                                 destruction or removal   the report must
                                                                 efficiency data          include: The process
                                                                 submitted, the report    type, process subtype
                                                                 must describe, where     for chamber clean
                                                                 available: The process   processes.
                                                                 type, process subtype   The report must include
                                                                 for chamber clean        the information
                                                                 processes.               described in
                                                                                          paragraphs (y)(2)(i)
                                                                                          through (v) of this
                                                                                          section. (iv) . . .
                                                                                          For any destruction or
                                                                                          removal efficiency
                                                                                          data submitted, the
                                                                                          report must describe:
                                                                                          The process type.
Subpart I (Electronics                 Emissions Data           The report must include  The report must include
 Manufacturing): 98.96(y)(2)(iv)        (categorical             the information          the information
 (proposed); 98.96(y)(2)(iv)            determination as         described in             described in
 (finalized).                           established in 2011:     paragraphs (y)(2)(i)     paragraphs (y)(2)(i)
                                        Emission data).          through (v) of this      through (v) of this
                                                                 section. (iv) . . .      section. (iv) . . .
                                                                 For any utilization,     For any utilization or
                                                                 by-product formation     by-product formation
                                                                 rate, and/or             rate, and/or
                                                                 destruction or removal   destruction or removal
                                                                 efficiency data          efficiency data
                                                                 submitted, the report    submitted, the report
                                                                 must describe, where     must include: The
                                                                 available: The input     input gases used and
                                                                 gases used and           measured.
                                                                 measured.
Subpart S (Lime Manufacturing):        Production/Throughput    Annual emission factors  Annual average emission
 98.196(b)(19).                         Data That are Not        for each lime product    factors for each lime
                                        Inputs to Emission       type produced.           product type produced.
                                        Equations (categorical
                                        determination as
                                        established in 2011:
                                        Not emission data but
                                        CBI).
Subpart S (Lime Manufacturing):        Production/Throughput    Annual emission factors  Annual average emission
 98.196(b)(20).                         Data That are Not        for each calcined        factors for each
                                        Inputs to Emission       byproduct/waste by       calcined byproduct/
                                        Equations (categorical   lime type that is sold.  waste by lime type
                                        determination as                                  that is sold.
                                        established in 2011:
                                        Not emission data but
                                        CBI).
Subpart X (Petrochemical Production):  Production/Throughput    If your petrochemical    If you are electing to
 98.246(a)(5) (proposed);               Data That are Not        process is an            consider the
 98.246(a)(5) (finalized).              Inputs to Emission       integrated ethylene      petrochemical process
                                        Equations (categorical   dichloride and vinyl     unit to be the entire
                                        determination as         chloride monomer         integrated ethylene
                                        established in 2011:     process, report either   dichloride/vinyl
                                        Not emission data but    the measured ethylene    chloride monomer
                                        CBI).                    dichloride production    process, report the
                                                                 (metric tons) or both    amount of intermediate
                                                                 the measured quantity    ethylene dichloride
                                                                 of vinyl chloride        produced (metric
                                                                 monomer production       tons). The reported
                                                                 (metric tons) and an     amount of intermediate
                                                                 estimate of the          EDC produced may be a
                                                                 ethylene dichloride      measured quantity or
                                                                 production (metric       an estimate that is
                                                                 tons).                   based on process
                                                                                          knowledge and best
                                                                                          available data.
Subpart X (Petrochemical Production):  Unit/Process Operating   Annual average of the    Annual average of the
 98.246(a)(14) (proposed);              Characteristics That     measurements of the      measurements or
 98.246(a)(14) (finalized).             are Not Inputs to        carbon content of each   determinations of the
                                        Emission Equations       feedstock and product.   carbon content of each
                                        (categorical             (i) For feedstocks and   feedstock and product
                                        determination as         products that are        conducted according to
                                        established in 2011:     gaseous or solid,        Sec.   98.243(c)(3) or
                                        Not emission data;       report this quantity     (c)(4). (i) For
                                        case-by-case             in kg carbon per kg of   feedstocks and
                                        determination: CBI).     feedstock or product.    products that are
                                                                 (ii) For liquid          gaseous or solid,
                                                                 feedstocks and           report this quantity
                                                                 products, report this    in kg C per kg of
                                                                 quantity either in       feedstock or product.
                                                                 units of kg carbon per   (ii) For liquid
                                                                 kg of feedstock or       feedstocks and
                                                                 production, or kg C      products, report this
                                                                 per gallon of            quantity either in
                                                                 feedstock or product.    units of kg C per kg
                                                                                          of feedstock or
                                                                                          product, or kg C per
                                                                                          gallon of feedstock or
                                                                                          product.

[[Page 89241]]

 
Subpart X (Petrochemical Production):  Unit/Process Operating   For each gaseous         For each gaseous
 98.246(a)(15) (proposed);              Characteristics That     feedstock and product,   feedstock and product,
 98.246(a)(15) (finalized).             are Not Inputs to        the annual average of    the annual average of
                                        Emission Equations;      the measurements of      the measurements or
                                        (categorical             molecular weight in      determinations of the
                                        determination as         units of kg per kg       molecular weight in
                                        established in 2011:     mole.                    units of kg per kg
                                        Not emission data;                                mole, conducted
                                        case-by-case                                      according to Sec.
                                        determination: CBI).                              98.243(c)(3) or
                                                                                          (c)(4).
Subpart X (Petrochemical Production):  Production/Throughput    If your petrochemical    If you are electing to
 98.246(b)(8) (proposed);               Data That are Not        process is an            consider the
 98.246(b)(8) (finalized).              Inputs to Emission       integrated ethylene      petrochemical process
                                        Equations (categorical   dichloride and vinyl     unit to be the entire
                                        determination: Not       chloride monomer         integrated ethylene
                                        emission data but CBI).  process, report either   dichloride/vinyl
                                                                 the measured ethylene    chloride monomer
                                                                 dichloride production    process, report the
                                                                 (metric tons) or both    amount of ethylene
                                                                 the measured quantity    dichloride produced
                                                                 of vinyl chloride        (metric tons). The
                                                                 monomer production       reported amount of
                                                                 (metric tons) and an     intermediate EDC
                                                                 estimate of the          produced may be a
                                                                 ethylene dichloride      measured quantity or
                                                                 product (metric tons).   an estimate that is
                                                                                          based on process
                                                                                          knowledge and best
                                                                                          available data.
Subpart DD (Electrical Transmission    ``Unit/Process `Static'  The following numbers    The number of SF6- or
 and Distribution Equipment Use):       Characteristics that     of pieces of             PFC-containing pieces
 98.306(n) (proposed); 98.306(n)        Are Not Inputs to        equipment: (1) New       of equipment in each
 (finalized).                           Emission Equations''     hermetically sealed-     of the following
                                        Direct Emitter Data      pressure switchgear      equipment categories:
                                        Category (categorical    during the year. (2)     (1) New hermetically
                                        determination as         New SF6- or PFC-         sealed-pressure
                                        established in 2011:     insulated equipment      switchgear during the
                                        Not emission data;       other than               year. (2) New
                                        case-by-case             hermetically sealed-     equipment other than
                                        determination: Not       pressure switchgear      hermetically sealed-
                                        CBI).                    during the year. (3)     pressure switchgear
                                                                 Retired hermetically     during the year. (3)
                                                                 sealed-pressure          Retired hermetically
                                                                 switchgear during the    sealed-pressure
                                                                 year. (4) Retired SF6-   switchgear during the
                                                                 or PFC-insulated         year. (4) Retired
                                                                 equipment other than     equipment other than
                                                                 hermetically sealed-     hermetically sealed-
                                                                 pressure switchgear      pressure switchgear
                                                                 during the year.         during the year.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For all other confidentially determinations for the new or 
substantially revised data reporting elements for these subparts, the 
EPA is finalizing the confidentiality determinations as they were 
proposed. Please refer to the preamble to the proposed rule (81 FR 
2574; January 15, 2016) for additional information regarding these 
confidentiality determinations.
2. Response to Public Comments on Proposed Confidentiality 
Determinations
    The EPA received several comments related to the proposed 
confidentiality determinations for new or substantially revised data 
elements. The EPA received only supportive comments on the proposed 
confidentiality determinations for all data elements except certain 
data elements in subparts I, V, and DD as described in this section. 
These supportive comments may be found in the EPA's comment response 
document in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526.
    For subparts I, V, and DD, we received comments questioning the 
proposed confidentiality determination of certain new and substantially 
revised data elements in subparts I, V, and DD, including requests that 
the data elements be treated as confidential. For the reasons described 
in section III.F of this preamble, we are not finalizing three data 
elements proposed to be included in the Triennial Report under subpart 
I (40 CFR 98.96(y)(2)(iv): Film type being manufactured, substrate 
type, and linewidth or technology node) where commenters questioned the 
proposed confidentiality determination. As such, we are not finalizing 
category assignments or confidentiality determinations for these data 
elements.
    For subparts V and DD, summaries of the commenters' concerns and 
the EPA's responses thereto are provided below. Additional comments and 
the EPA's responses may be found in the comment response document noted 
above.
    Comment: One commenter opposed the proposed confidentiality 
determination of ``Not CBI'' for the date of abatement technology 
installation in 40 CFR 98.226(h) and requested that this data element 
be considered CBI.
    Response: The EPA disagrees that the reported date of abatement 
technology installation should be treated as CBI. The commenter failed 
to provide any justification for their contention that this data 
element should be treated as CBI. As discussed in the preamble to the 
proposed amendments (81 FR 2594; January 15, 2016), the EPA requested 
that commenters disagreeing with EPA's ``Not CBI'' determination 
indicate why the data element is entitled to confidential treatment 
under the provisions in 40 CFR 2.208. Specifically, the EPA requested 
that commenters specify how the public release of the data element 
would or would not cause a competitive disadvantage to a reporter and 
how this data element may be different from or similar to data that are 
already publicly available. If the commenter was making the argument 
that competitors could use the particular data element to discern 
sensitive information, the EPA requested that the commenter describe 
the pathway by which this could occur and explain how the discerned 
information would negatively affect a reporter's competitive position, 
as well as describe any unique process or aspect of a facility that 
would be revealed if the new or revised data element were made publicly 
available. If the commenter was making the argument that the data 
element would cause harm only when used in combination with other 
publicly available data, the EPA requested that the commenter describe 
the other data, identify the public source(s) of these data, explain 
how the combination of data could be used to cause competitive harm, 
and describe the measures currently taken to keep the data 
confidential. As noted above, the commenter failed to provide any such 
rationale. Based on our evaluation of this new data element, we see no 
reason why the date of installation would be considered proprietary 
information. The GHGRP Web site already publicly releases the number 
and type of abatement technologies used by reporters under 40 CFR part 
98, subpart V (see https://ghgdata.epa.gov/ghgp/service/facilityDetail/2014?id=1002830&ds=E&et=undefined&popup=true). As stated in the 
preamble to the proposed rule (81 FR 2577; January 15, 2016), the date 
of installation does not

[[Page 89242]]

provide insight into current production rates, raw material 
consumption, or other information that competitors could use to discern 
market share and other sensitive information. Further, information 
regarding the date of installation of abatement devices constitutes 
general information that is already available to the public through 
other sources (e.g., construction permits). For the reasons stated 
above, the EPA is finalizing its confidentiality determinations for 40 
CFR 98.226(h) as proposed.
    Comment: One commenter contended that EPA should change its 
proposed confidentiality determination for the proposed subpart DD 
reporting requirements because detailed equipment counts, equipment 
types, and linked geographical data will relay company-specific 
information that may jeopardize competitive advantage in the industry. 
The commenter requested that the requirements for reporters to 
distinguish between hermetically sealed-pressure equipment and other 
SF6-containing equipment be considered CBI.
    Response: We are finalizing as proposed our determination of ``Not 
CBI'' for the new subpart DD reporting elements. Among these new 
elements are the numbers of SF6- or PFC-containing pieces of 
equipment in each of the following categories: (i) New hermetically 
sealed-pressure switchgear during the year; (ii) new equipment other 
than hermetically sealed-pressure switchgear during the year; (iii) 
retired hermetically sealed-pressure switchgear during the year; and 
(iv) retired equipment other than hermetically sealed-pressure 
switchgear during the year. While the commenter asserts that publishing 
these data elements ``will relay company-specific information that may 
jeopardize competitive advantage in the industry,'' the commenter does 
not provide any explanation of or support for this assertion. Thus, we 
conclude, as stated in the preamble to the proposed rule (81 FR 2578), 
that DD reporters are ``are public or publicly-regulated utilities that 
are not affected by competitive market conditions that may apply to 
other industries'' and that ``these [required] data elements do not 
disclose any information about a manufacturing process or operating 
conditions that would be proprietary.'' Moreover, even if ``detailed 
equipment counts [and] equipment types'' posed disclosure concerns, we 
note that these new requirements are only for facilities to report the 
numbers of pieces of equipment that are new or retired during the year 
by one of two broad equipment types, not for facilities to report 
detailed inventories of the numbers of pieces and types of equipment in 
use. Regarding the commenter's statement that the equipment counts 
would be linked to geographical data, we did not propose that 
facilities report the counts of new and retiring equipment by state, 
but that facilities report their miles of transmission and distribution 
lines by state. As discussed in section III.Q of this preamble, we are 
requiring in the final rule that facilities report only the states in 
which they lie.

C. Final Confidentiality Determinations for Other Part 98 Data 
Reporting Elements for Which No Determination Has Been Previously 
Established

1. Summary of Final CBI Determinations
    The EPA is finalizing all confidentiality determinations for other 
Part 98 data reporting elements for which no determination has been 
previously established as they were proposed, except confidentiality 
determinations that were proposed for subpart PP (40 CFR 98.426(h)(1) 
through (3)) and subpart RR (40 CFR 98.446(a)(1), 40 CFR 
98.446(a)(2)(i) through (iii), 40 CFR 98.446(a)(3)(i) through (iii), 40 
CFR 98.446(b)(1) through (4), 40 CFR 98.446(c), and 40 CFR 
98.446(f)(4)(i) through (iv)). Please refer to the preamble to the 
proposed rule (81 FR 2574, January 15, 2016) for additional information 
regarding the proposed confidentiality determinations.
    The EPA is not finalizing confidentiality determinations that were 
proposed for subpart PP or subpart RR because we do not have sufficient 
information at this time to make categorical determinations. Currently, 
these subpart PP requirements potentially affect few facilities; 
however, there is the potential for growth in the number of affected 
facilities in the future. The EPA is therefore not finalizing 
categorical confidentiality determinations at this time for these 
subpart PP data elements in order to allow the agency to consider the 
potentially broader group of affected facilities likely to exist in the 
future. Further, because these subpart PP data elements are related to 
the subpart RR data elements, the EPA is also not finalizing 
confidentiality determinations for these subpart RR data elements at 
this time.
2. Response to Comments on Proposed Confidentiality Determinations
    The EPA received several comments related to the proposed 
confidentiality determinations for the other Part 98 data reporting 
elements for which no determination has been previously established. 
The EPA received only supportive or minor comments on the proposed 
confidentiality determinations for all data elements except 40 CFR 
98.426(h)(3), and is finalizing the confidentiality determinations as 
proposed. These comments may be found in the EPA's comment response 
document in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526.
    For 40 CFR 98.426(h)(3), a summary of this comment and EPA's 
response thereto is provided below.
    Comment: The EPA received comments both supporting and opposing the 
``Not CBI'' determination for the subpart PP data element that requires 
reporting of the amount of CO2 captured from an electric 
generating unit and delivered to a facility reporting under subpart RR. 
The commenters opposing the ``Not CBI'' determination asserted that the 
quantity of CO2 transferred by the EGU and the quantity of 
CO2 received at the ER facility are essentially the same, 
and that publication of the quantity of CO2 transferred by 
the EGU would likely cause significant competitive harm, resulting in 
unwillingness on the part of the ER industry to purchase such 
CO2. They recommended that, analogous to subpart RR, EPA add 
a data element to subpart PP that distinguishes between ER and non-ER 
sites and treat that data element consistently with ER facility CBI 
determinations in subparts RR and UU. One commenter supported the 
proposed ``Not CBI'' determination for the amount of CO2 
transferred to a subpart RR facility, but recommended that the EPA 
balance the needs of industry and the need for public confidence in the 
ability of ER to sequester CO2.
    Response: After careful consideration of public comment, the EPA is 
not finalizing categorical confidentiality determinations for this 
subpart PP data element. We do not have sufficient information at this 
time to make categorical determinations. Currently, these requirements 
potentially affect few facilities; however, there is the potential for 
growth in the number of affected facilities in the future. The EPA is 
therefore not finalizing categorical confidentiality determinations at 
this time in order to allow the Agency to consider the potentially 
broader group of affected facilities likely to exist in the future.
    The commenters requested that EPA add a data reporting element to 
subpart PP that distinguishes between CO2 being sent to ER 
and non-ER subpart RR facilities. The purpose of the

[[Page 89243]]

commenter's request was linked to the development of a categorical 
confidentiality determination for 40 CFR 98.426(h)(3). Because the EPA 
is not finalizing categorical confidentiality determinations at this 
time for 40 CFR 98.426(h)(3), the EPA is not finalizing the commenters' 
request to add a data reporting element to subpart PP.

V. Impacts of the Final Amendments

    This section of the preamble examines the costs and economic 
impacts of the final rule and the estimated economic impacts of the 
rule on affected entities.
    The revisions in this final rule are anticipated to increase burden 
in cases where the amendments expand the applicability or reporting 
requirements of Part 98, and are anticipated to decrease burden in 
cases where the amendments streamline Part 98 to remove notification or 
reporting requirements or simplify the data that must be reported. Most 
subparts include revisions that will result in some increase in burden, 
as well as revisions that will result in some decrease in burden. As 
discussed in the preamble to the proposed rule, in several cases the 
final rule amendments are anticipated to result in a decrease in 
burden, but we were unable to quantify this decrease. Therefore, the 
impacts for the final rule generally reflect an increase in burden for 
most subparts.
    The EPA received several comments on the proposed revisions and the 
impacts of the proposed rule. As a result of these comments, the EPA 
has, in some cases, revised the final rule requirements and updated the 
impacts analysis to reflect these changes. For some subparts, we are 
not finalizing revisions to monitoring or reporting requirements that 
would have required reporters to collect or submit additional data. For 
example, for subpart I (Electronics Manufacturing) reporters, as 
discussed in section III.F of this preamble, we are revising the 
information required to be collected as part of the triennial report in 
this final rule and not finalizing the collection of certain proposed 
data. Similarly, the EPA is not finalizing certain data elements that 
were proposed to be added to subparts CC (Soda Ash Manufacturing), DD 
(Electrical Transmission and Distribution Equipment Use), HH (Municipal 
Solid Waste Landfills), and RR (Geologic Sequestration of Carbon 
Dioxide). For subpart FF (Underground Coal Mines) reporters, we are not 
finalizing revisions that would have eliminated the use of MSHA 
quarterly inspection reports to be used as a source of data for 
monitoring methane liberated from ventilation systems, and we are not 
finalizing revisions that would have required reporters to report coal 
production data. Therefore, the final burden for these subparts has 
been revised to reflect only those requirements that are being 
finalized, and is significantly lower than proposed.
    In other cases, the EPA has adjusted the burden of the final rule 
to better reflect the costs associated with the final revisions. For 
example, for subpart C (General Stationary Combustion), we have revised 
the burden estimate for the reporting of the cumulative maximum rated 
heat input capacity for all units within the GP or CP configuration 
that have a maximum rated heat input capacity greater than or equal to 
10 (mmBtu/hr). As discussed in section III.B of this preamble, the EPA 
agrees with commenters that the burden provided in the proposed rule 
for these data elements was understated. The revised burden estimate 
reflects additional time and labor that may be required to collect the 
maximum rated heat input capacity for multiple units and to aggregate 
these capacities, and therefore reflects an overall increase in burden 
for subpart C reporters. Additional information on these estimates may 
be found in section V.A of this preamble.
    As discussed in section I.E of this preamble, we are implementing 
the final revisions in stages for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 RY reports 
in order to stagger the implementation of these changes over time and 
provide time for needed software revisions. The burden has been 
determined based on when the revisions would be implemented. One-time 
implementation costs will accrue for certain revisions to applicability 
and reporting provisions that will apply in RY2017 and RY2018; 
therefore, we have estimated costs through RY2019 to reflect the 
subsequent year costs incurred by industry. The incremental 
implementation costs for all subparts for each reporting year are 
summarized in Table 7 of this preamble. The estimated incremental 
burden is $636,124 ($2014) for all proposed revisions affecting RY2016 
through RY2018, including $5,268 from revisions that apply to RY2016 
reports, $407,268 from revisions that apply to RY2017 reports, and 
$223,588 from revisions that apply to RY2018 reports. The estimated 
annual burden is $189,150 ($2014) per year following implementation of 
all changes. The incremental burden by subpart is shown in Table 8 of 
this preamble. One-time implementation costs are incorporated into 
first year costs, while subsequent year costs represent the annual 
burden that will be incurred in total by all affected reporters.

                            Table 7--Incremental Burden for Reporting Years 2016-2019
                                                  [$2014/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Cost summary                        RY2016          RY2017          RY2018          RY2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First Year Costs................................      \a\ $5,268        $402,789    \b\ $129,397  ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Subsequent Year Annual Costs for Revisions Implemented in:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2016............................................  ..............           4,479           4,479       \a\ 5,268
2017............................................  ..............  ..............          89,712          89,712
2018............................................  ..............  ..............  ..............          94,959
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total Costs by Year (all subparts)..........           5,268         407,268         223,588     \a\ 189,939
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes additional labor costs of $789 for reporting data elements for subpart I for a triennial report
  submitted once every three years. Total Costs by Year for RY2019 are based on all subsequent year costs
  ($189,150) plus these additional labor costs for subpart I.
\b\ Includes one-time implementation costs for new reporters under subparts V and OO.

[[Page 89244]]

                                                         Table 8--Incremental Burden by Subpart
                                                                         [$2014]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Costs for additional reporters      Costs for revisions to                Total cost
                                                         --------------------------------            reporting           -------------------------------
                         Subpart                                                         --------------------------------
                                                            First-Year      Subsequent-                     Subsequent-     First-Year      Subsequent-
                                                                               Year         First-Year         Year                            Year
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Revisions Reflected Starting in RY2016
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A \a\...................................................              $0              $0            $606            $606            $606            $606
I \b\...................................................               0               0             789               0             789               0
HH......................................................               0               0           3,872           3,872           3,872           3,872
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total Costs for Revisions Implemented in RY2016.....  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............           5,268           4,479
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Revisions Reflected Starting in RY2017
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A \a\...................................................               0               0           4,179           4,179           4,179           4,179
C.......................................................               0               0         387,587          74,511         387,587          74,511
E.......................................................               0               0              11              11              11              11
F.......................................................               0               0              66              66              66              66
G.......................................................               0               0             252             252             252             252
N \c\...................................................               0               0               0               0               0               0
O.......................................................               0               0             117             117             117             117
Q \c\...................................................               0               0             460             460             460             460
S.......................................................               0               0             833             833             833             833
U\c\....................................................               0               0               0               0               0               0
X.......................................................               0               0           1,403           1,403           1,403           1,403
Z.......................................................               0               0              44              44              44              44
AA\c\...................................................               0               0               0               0               0               0
CC\c\...................................................               0               0               0               0               0               0
DD......................................................               0               0           1,038           1,038           1,038           1,038
FF......................................................               0               0           2,265           2,265           2,265           2,265
II......................................................               0               0           2,722           2,722           2,722           2,722
LL\d\...................................................               0               0             -18             -18             -18             -18
MM\c\...................................................               0               0               0               0               0               0
NN......................................................               0               0           1,830           1,830           1,830           1,830
PP \c\..................................................               0               0               0               0               0               0
TT \c\..................................................               0               0               0               0               0               0
UU \c\..................................................               0               0               0               0               0               0
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total Costs for Revisions Implemented in RY2017.....  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............         402,789          89,712
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Revisions Reflected Starting in RY2018
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P \c\...................................................               0               0               0               0               0               0
V.......................................................          88,583          63,509             135             135          88,718          63,644
Y.......................................................               0               0           1,534           1,534           1,534           1,534
OO......................................................          38,502          29,138             643             643          39,145          29,781
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Total Costs for Revisions Implemented in RY2018.  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............         129,397          94,959
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................................         127,085          92,646         410,369          96,503         537,454         189,150
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Costs for subpart A for RY2016 reflect revisions to 40 CFR 98.2(i)(3) and (5) related to notifying the Administrator the facility or supplier will
  cease reporting. All other costs for subpart A are reflected in revisions starting in RY2017.
\b\ Costs for subpart I include new data elements related to the triennial technology report required by 40 CFR 98.96(y). The first report must be
  submitted with RY2016 reports on March 31, 2017 and every three years thereafter. Subpart I reporters will subsequently incur these costs ($789) every
  three years. For the purposes of estimating burden, the annual costs associated with the data elements were included in the total incremental
  estimates for RY2016 and RY2019 (see Table 7 of this preamble) and not for RY2017 or RY2018, and are not reflected in the total subsequent year costs.
\c\ The final changes to this subpart include only minor revisions, clarifications, and corrections that have no impact on the burden to reporters.
\d\ This entry is a negative value because certain reporting requirements were removed from subpart LL and no new reporting requirements were added for
  the subpart, resulting in a net cost savings for this source category.

    A full discussion of the impacts may be found in the memorandum, 
``Assessment of Burden Impacts of Final 2015 Revisions to the 
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule,'' available in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2015-0526.

A. How was the incremental burden of the final rule estimated?

    The estimated incremental change in burden from the final 
amendments to Part 98 include burden associated with: (1) Revisions to 
the reporting requirements by adding, revising, or removing existing 
reporting requirements (20 subparts); and (2) revisions to the 
applicability of subparts such that additional facilities would be 
required to report under Part 98 (subparts V and OO).
1. Burden Associated With the Revision of Reporting Requirements
    The final rule includes amendments that add reporting requirements 
or revise existing reporting requirements to

[[Page 89245]]

collect more detailed facility data. The final amendments collectively 
add or revise data elements in 20 subparts of part 98, including 92 
data elements that were not previously required to be collected. The 
collection of these new and revised data elements does not add new 
monitoring requirements, and does not substantially affect the type of 
information that must be collected. For all of these additional data 
elements, the EPA has estimated a nominal additional cost to report the 
data element and fulfill the recordkeeping requirements. The final 
amendments will also remove 18 data elements in subparts O, Y, DD, HH, 
and LL. For these data elements, the EPA has estimated a nominal 
reduction in cost, since reporters would no longer be required to 
report the data element.
    All costs to the regulated industry resulting from revisions to the 
reporting requirements for the GHGRP are annual labor costs (i.e., the 
cost of labor by facility staff to meet the rule's information 
collection requirements). For each subpart, the EPA determined the 
incremental change in annual hourly labor estimates by multiplying the 
number of data elements that were added, revised, or removed in each 
subpart by the number of hours required to review each data element and 
the number of affected reporters for each subpart. Where data elements 
were removed in subparts O, Y, DD, HH, and LL, a reduction in the 
annual hourly labor estimate was assumed. Labor costs were applied to 
the total annual hour estimates for each labor category to obtain the 
total costs for each subpart.
    The EPA is revising the burden associated with the reporting of one 
new data element for subpart C reporters in this final rule. As 
discussed in section III.B of this preamble, for emissions reported 
using the aggregation of units (GP) and common pipe (CP) 
configurations, the EPA is finalizing as proposed requirements under 40 
CFR 98.36(c)(1)(iii) and 40 CFR 98.36(c)(3)(ii) to report the 
cumulative maximum rated heat input capacity for all units (within each 
configuration) that have a maximum rated heat input capacity greater 
than or equal to 10 (mmBtu/hr). However, several commenters disagreed 
with our assessment that the burden associated with this data element 
was minimal. Commenters urged that collection of this data element 
could be burdensome to reporters from a time, resources, and cost 
perspective given the number of units, noting that this data element 
would need to be reassessed and updated annually for accuracy. After 
further consideration, we have adjusted the annual hourly labor 
estimate associated with the reporting of this data element to include 
the additional time needed to determine the units included under each 
configuration and to aggregate the maximum rated heat input capacities 
for all units greater than 10 (mmBtu/hr). To adjust the burden, the EPA 
multiplied the revised annual hourly labor estimate by the number of 
affected reporters anticipated. The EPA determined that an increase in 
the estimated associated burden is reasonable because the reporting of 
this data element requires the collection and aggregation of data from 
multiple units included in the configuration. After the first year of 
reporting, a reporter would only be anticipated to update the data 
element to adjust the units included under a GP or CP configuration to 
reflect facility changes. Therefore, the annual hourly labor estimates 
for this data element reflect first- and subsequent-year costs.
    In this final rule, the anticipated incremental cost associated 
with the addition, revision, and removal of reporting requirements from 
all subparts is $5,268 for RY2016, $402,789 for RY2017, and $2,313 for 
RY2018. The estimated annual burden from these reporting revisions is 
$96,503 per year following implementation of all revisions. The total 
annual burden for each subpart is assumed to be equal for the first and 
subsequent years, with the exception of subparts C and I. For subpart 
C, the estimated incremental cost associated with reporting the new, 
revised, and removed data elements includes additional burden and costs 
($313,077) for certain subpart C reporters for the initial collection 
and aggregation of data for the reporting of the cumulative maximum 
rated heat input capacity for units included in a GP or CP 
configuration (40 CFR 98.36(c)(1)(iii) or 40 CFR 98.36(c)(3)(ii)), 
which is anticipated to affect 3,597 reporters. This additional burden 
applies to RY2017 only; for all subsequent years, the burden for these 
data elements is anticipated at $74,511. For subpart I, the new data 
elements in the final rule pertain to the triennial technology report 
required under 40 CFR 98.96(y), which must first be submitted with 
RY2016 reports on or before March 31, 2017 and every three years 
thereafter. For the purposes of estimating burden, the annual costs 
associated with these data elements ($789) were applied to RY2016 only.
2. Burden Associated With Revisions That Affect Applicability
    The EPA is finalizing revisions that affect the applicability of 
two subparts of part 98: Subpart V (Nitric Acid Production) and subpart 
OO (Suppliers of Industrial Greenhouse Gases). These final revisions, 
which will apply beginning in RY2018, are anticipated to require 
reporting for four additional reporters under subpart V, and five to 
ten additional reporters under subpart OO. (For the purposes of 
estimating burden, an average of eight additional reporters were 
assumed to be required to report under subpart OO of part 98). The 
majority of facilities within these industries already report under 
part 98; specifically, all four of the affected reporters under subpart 
V already submit annual reports. The total incremental burden from 
revisions to applicability is $127,085 in the first year and $92,646 in 
subsequent years ($2014). The incremental burden for the additional 
reporters for subpart V includes first-year costs of $88,583 ($22,146 
per facility) and subsequent year costs of $63,509 ($15,877 per 
facility). The incremental burden for the additional reporters for 
subpart OO includes first-year costs of $38,502 ($4,813 per facility) 
and subsequent year costs of $29,138 ($3,642 per facility).
    To estimate the cost impacts for additional reporters, the recent 
information collection requests for the GHG reporting program \29\ were 
used to obtain the first year average cost per facility that is 
incurred from reporting under subparts V and OO (updated to $2014) and 
the subsequent year burden. These average costs per facility include 
labor costs, capital costs, and operation and maintenance costs. We 
determined total reporting costs for each subpart by assigning these 
costs to model facilities that are representative of each industry 
sector. The total cost for each subpart was determined by multiplying 
the model facilities cost by the number of affected facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See Supporting Statement Part A: Information Collection 
Request for the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program. OMB Control No. 
2060-0629. EPA ICR No. 2300.10. (U.S. EPA, 2013) and Supporting 
Statement Part A: Information Collection Request for the Greenhouse 
Gas Reporting Program. OMB Control No. 2060-0629. EPA ICR No. 
2300.17. (U.S. EPA, 2016)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Additional Impacts of the Proposed Revisions to Part 98

    In addition to amendments that revise the existing applicability or 
reporting requirements of part 98, the EPA is finalizing additional 
revisions and other clarifications to several subparts in part 98 that 
are not anticipated to have a significant impact on burden. These 
include revisions discussed in section III of this preamble that are 
intended to streamline the rule requirements, including revisions to 
clarify and revise

[[Page 89246]]

the requirements of part 98 in order to focus GHGRP and reporter 
resources on relevant data, to expand and clarify the conditions under 
which a facility can cease reporting, or to clarify requirements for 
facilities that report very little or no emissions, and revisions that 
would improve the efficiency of the reporting and verification process. 
These revisions are anticipated to minimally reduce burden for 
reporters.
    The EPA is also finalizing revisions that are intended to improve 
the quality of the rule but that do not impact burden, such as amending 
calculation methods to improve the accuracy of the emissions estimate 
(e.g., subparts I and Y); these amendments increase the accuracy of 
reported emissions, but do not require additional monitoring or data 
collection by reporters, and have no additional impact on burden.
    We are finalizing, for certain subparts, revised monitoring or 
measurement methods that more closely align rule requirements with 
different operating scenarios in the industry. Other amendments provide 
flexibility for reporters and clarify reporting requirements. These 
amendments are anticipated to have no impact or minimally decrease 
burden for reporters.
    The final revisions also include minor amendments, corrections, and 
clarifications, including simple revisions of requirements such as 
clarifying changes to definitions, calculation methodologies, 
monitoring and quality assurance requirements, missing data procedures, 
and reporting requirements. These revisions clarify part 98 to better 
reflect the EPA's intent, and do not present any additional burden on 
reporters.
    A full discussion of the burden associated with the final revisions 
for each subpart may be found in the memorandum, ``Assessment of Burden 
Impacts of Final 2015 Revisions to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' 
available in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

    This action is a significant regulatory action that was submitted 
to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review because the 
amendments raise novel legal or policy issues. Any changes made in 
response to OMB recommendations have been documented in the docket. The 
EPA prepared an analysis of the burden associated with this action. A 
copy of the analysis is available in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-
0526 and is briefly summarized in section V of this preamble.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    The information collection activities in this rule have been 
submitted for approval to the OMB under the PRA. The Information 
Collection Request (ICR) document that the EPA prepared has been 
assigned EPA ICR number 2300.18. You can find a copy of the ICR in the 
docket for this rule, and it is briefly summarized here. The 
information collection requirements are not enforceable until OMB 
approves them.
    This action amends specific provisions in the Greenhouse Gas 
Reporting Rule to streamline and improve implementation of the rule, 
improve the quality and consistency of the data collected under the 
rule, and to clarify or make minor updates to certain provisions that 
have been the subject of questions from reporting entities. These 
amendments will improve the quality and consistency of the data 
collected, as well as improve the efficiency of the reporting process 
for both the EPA and reporters. The amendments are anticipated to 
increase burden in cases where they expand current applicability, 
monitoring, or reporting, and are anticipated to decrease burden in 
cases where they streamline part 98 to remove notification or reporting 
requirements or simplify the data that must be reported.
    Specifically, this action amends the reporting requirements to add 
or revise 112 data elements in 20 subparts of part 98. These revisions 
are necessary to improve the quality of the data collected under the 
GHGRP. The EPA is also removing 18 data elements in five subparts, 
which streamlines rule requirements. This action also amends the 
applicability of two subparts of part 98: Subparts V (Nitric Acid 
Production) and OO (Suppliers of Industrial Greenhouse Gases). These 
amendments could increase the number of facilities required to report 
under part 98. Impacts associated with the revisions to the 
applicability and reporting requirements are detailed in the memorandum 
``Assessment of Burden Impacts of Final 2015 Revisions to the 
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-
0526). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    The total estimated incremental burden and costs associated with 
the revisions is 9,196 hours and $636,124 ($2014) over the three years 
covered by the information collection. These costs include $5,268 in 
RY2016, $407,268 in RY2017, and $223,588 in RY2018, averaging $212,041 
over the three years. The total estimated reporters affected by the 
amendments is 7,971. The frequency of response for these revisions is 
once annually, with the exception of certain data elements for subpart 
I that will be submitted once every three years.
    The estimated incremental costs and hour burden associated with the 
addition and revision of 112 data elements and the removal of 18 data 
elements in 20 subparts include $5,268 ($2014) in RY2016, $402,789 in 
RY2017, and $2,313 for RY2018. The estimated burden from these 
revisions is $96,503 ($2014) per year following implementation of all 
revisions. The total annual burden for each subpart is assumed to be 
equal for the first and subsequent years, with the exception of 
subparts C and I. For subpart C, the estimated incremental cost 
associated with reporting the new, revised, and removed data elements 
includes additional burden and costs ($313,077) for certain subpart C 
reporters for the initial collection and aggregation of data for the 
reporting of the cumulative maximum rated heat input capacity for units 
included in a GP or CP configuration (40 CFR 98.36(c)(1)(iii) or 40 CFR 
98.36(c)(3)(ii)). This additional burden applies to RY2017 only. For 
subpart I, the new data elements pertain to the triennial technology 
report required under 40 CFR 98.96(y), which must first be submitted 
with RY2016 reports on or before March 31, 2017 and every three years 
thereafter. For the purposes of estimating burden for the three years 
covered by the information collection, the annual costs associated with 
these data elements ($789) will apply for RY2016 only.
    The estimated incremental cost burden associated with additional 
reporters to subparts V and OO is $127,085 in the first year (RY2018) 
and $92,646 in subsequent years. The incremental burden for the 
additional reporters for subpart V includes first-year costs of $88,583 
and subsequent year costs of $63,509. The incremental burden for the 
additional reporters for subpart OO includes first-year costs of 
$38,502 and subsequent year costs of $29,138. The estimated number of 
likely new respondents that will result from these amendments is 12, 
including four additional reporters under subpart V, and an average of 
eight additional reporters for subpart OO. The annual hourly burden for 
these additional reporters is based on the annual average hourly burden 
for existing reporters

[[Page 89247]]

under subparts V and OO, which is 186 hours and 56 hours per reporter, 
respectively.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the 
EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When OMB 
approves this ICR, the Agency will announce that approval in the 
Federal Register and publish a technical amendment to 40 CFR part 9 to 
display the OMB control number for the approved information collection 
activities contained in this final rule.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In 
making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant 
adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no 
net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small 
entities subject to the rule. The impact to small entities due to the 
revisions was evaluated for each subpart. The EPA conducted a screening 
assessment comparing compliance costs for revisions to reporting 
requirements, applicability to new reporters, and monitoring revisions 
under subparts V and OO to specific receipts data for establishments 
owned by small businesses in each industry. 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 
1 percent. The cost-to-sales ratios were constructed at the 
establishment level (average reporting program costs per establishment/
average establishment receipts) for several business size ranges. We 
determined that the cost-to-sales ratios are less than 1 percent for 
all establishments in all business size ranges for subparts V and OO. 
Therefore, we have determined that there will not be a significant 
economic impact to small entities for these subparts. Refer to the 
memorandum ``Assessment of Burden Impacts of Final 2015 Revisions to 
the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2015-0526) for further discussion of this analysis. For all other 
subparts, which are only affected by revisions for adding, revising, or 
removing reporting requirements, we determined that these facilities 
will experience average annual impacts of approximately $16 per 
facility in the first year and $11 per facility in subsequent years. 
Subpart C reporters would be anticipated to experience the highest 
facility burden of $111 per facility in the first year and $24 in 
subsequent years. For subpart C reporters, this burden represents less 
than 3 percent of the total annual facility costs. Because these costs 
are minimal, no small entity impacts are anticipated for the remaining 
subparts. Refer to the memorandum ``Assessment of Burden Impacts of 
Final 2015 Revisions to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule'' (see Docket 
Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0526) for further discussion of this analysis.
    Although there are no significant small entity impacts associated 
with this action, the EPA took several steps to reduce the impact on 
small entities. These final rule amendments include multiple revisions 
intended to streamline implementation and reduce the monitoring, 
recordkeeping, and reporting burden for all entities, including small 
entities. Other rule amendments are minor corrections, clarifying, and 
other amendments that will not impose any new requirement on small 
entities that are not currently regulated by part 98. In addition, the 
EPA conducted several meetings with industry associations to discuss 
regulatory options and the corresponding burden on industry. We have 
therefore concluded that this action will have no net regulatory burden 
for all directly regulated small entities. The EPA continues to conduct 
significant outreach on the GHGRP and maintains an ``open door'' policy 
for stakeholders to help inform the EPA's understanding of key issues 
for the industries.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million or 
more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538. See section V of this 
preamble for an explanation of costs for this action. This final rule 
is also not subject to the requirements of UMRA because it contains no 
regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments. None of the facilities currently known to undertake 
these activities are owned by small governments.

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.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13175. The rule amendments will not result in any 
significant changes to the monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting 
currently required for entities subject to 40 CFR part 98. Thus, 
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action. Consistent with 
the EPA Policy on Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribes, the 
EPA consulted with tribal officials during the development of the rules 
for part 98. A summary of that consultation is provided in sections 
VIII.E and VIII.F of the preamble to the October 30, 2009 final GHG 
reporting rule.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those 
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks 
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect 
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in 
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to 
Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern an environmental 
health risk or safety risk.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' because it is 
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, 
distribution or use of energy. Part 98 relates to monitoring, 
reporting, and recordkeeping and does not impact energy supply, 
distribution, or use. This final rule amends calculation and reporting 
requirements for the GHGRP. In addition, the EPA is finalizing 
confidentiality determinations for new and revised data elements and 
for certain existing data elements for which a confidentiality 
determination has not previously been proposed, or where the EPA has 
determined that the previous determination was no longer appropriate. 
These amendments and confidentiality determinations do not make any 
changes to the existing monitoring, calculation, and reporting 
requirements under part 98 that affect the supply, distribution, or use 
of energy.

[[Page 89248]]

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes that this action is not subject to Executive Order 
12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) because it does not establish an 
environmental health or safety standard. This regulatory action 
includes amendments to a previously promulgated rule addressing 
information collection and reporting procedures and does not affect the 
level of protection provided to human health or the environment.

K. Congressional Review Act

    This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule 
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of 
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 
U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 98

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Greenhouse gases, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Suppliers.

    Dated: November 17, 2016.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Environmental 
Protection Agency amends title 40, chapter I, of the Code of Federal 
Regulations as follows:

PART 98--MANDATORY GREENHOUSE GAS REPORTING

0
1. The authority citation for part 98 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Subpart A--General Provision

0
2. Amend Sec.  98.2 by revising paragraph (i)(3) and adding a reserved 
paragraph (i)(4) and paragraph (i)(5) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.2  Who must report?

    (i) * * *
    (3) If the operations of a facility or supplier are changed such 
that all applicable processes and operations subject to paragraphs 
(a)(1) through (4) of this section cease to operate, then the owner or 
operator may discontinue complying with this part for the reporting 
years following the year in which cessation of such operations occurs, 
provided that the owner or operator submits a notification to the 
Administrator that announces the cessation of reporting and certifies 
to the closure of all applicable processes and operations no later than 
March 31 of the year following such changes. If one or more processes 
or operations subject to paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this section 
at a facility or supplier cease to operate, but not all applicable 
processes or operations cease to operate, then the owner or operator is 
exempt from reporting for any such processes or operations in the 
reporting years following the reporting year in which cessation of the 
process or operation occurs, provided that the owner or operator 
submits a notification to the Administrator that announces the 
cessation of reporting for the process or operation no later than March 
31 following the first reporting year in which the process or operation 
has ceased for an entire reporting year. Cessation of operations in the 
context of underground coal mines includes, but is not limited to, 
abandoning and sealing the facility. This paragraph (i)(3) does not 
apply to seasonal or other temporary cessation of operations. This 
paragraph (i)(3) does not apply to the municipal solid waste landfills 
source category (subpart HH of this subpart), or the industrial waste 
landfills source category (subpart TT of this part). The owner or 
operator must resume reporting for any future calendar year during 
which any of the GHG-emitting processes or operations resume operation.
    (4) [Reserved]
    (5) If the operations of a facility or supplier are changed such 
that a process or operation no longer meets the ``Definition of Source 
Category'' as specified in an applicable subpart, then the owner or 
operator may discontinue complying with any such subpart for the 
reporting years following the year in which change occurs, provided 
that the owner or operator submits a notification to the Administrator 
that announces the cessation of reporting for the process or operation 
no later than March 31 following the first reporting year in which such 
changes persist for an entire reporting year. The owner or operator 
must resume complying with this part for the process or operation 
starting in any future calendar year during which the process or 
operation meets the ``Definition of Source Category'' as specified in 
an applicable subpart.
* * * * *

0
3. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.2 by revising paragraphs 
(a)(1) and (i)(1) and (2) and adding paragraphs (i)(4) and (6) to read 
as follows:

Sec.  98.2  Who must report?

    (a) * * *
    (1) A facility that contains any source category that is listed in 
Table A-3 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 Tables A-3 and A-4 of this 
subpart.
* * * * *
    (i) * * *
    (1) If reported emissions are less than 25,000 metric tons 
CO2e per year for five consecutive years, then the owner or 
operator may discontinue complying with this part provided that the 
owner or operator submits a notification to the Administrator that 
announces the cessation of reporting and explains the reasons for the 
reduction in emissions. The notification shall be submitted no later 
than March 31 of the year immediately following the fifth consecutive 
year of emissions less than 25,000 tons CO2e per year. The 
owner or operator must maintain the corresponding records required 
under Sec.  98.3(g) for each of the five consecutive years prior to 
notification of discontinuation of reporting and retain such records 
for three years following the year that reporting was discontinued. The 
owner or operator must resume reporting if annual emissions in any 
future calendar year increase to 25,000 metric tons CO2e per 
year or more.
    (2) If reported emissions are less than 15,000 metric tons 
CO2e per year for three consecutive years, then the owner or 
operator may discontinue complying with this part provided that the 
owner or operator submits a notification to the Administrator that 
announces the cessation of reporting and explains the reasons for the 
reduction in emissions. The notification shall be submitted no later 
than March 31 of the year immediately following the third consecutive 
year of emissions less than 15,000 tons CO2e per year. The 
owner or operator must maintain the corresponding records required 
under Sec.  98.3(g) for each of the three consecutive years and retain 
such records for three years prior to notification of discontinuation 
of reporting following the year that reporting was discontinued. The 
owner or operator must resume reporting if annual emissions in any 
future calendar

[[Page 89249]]

year increase to 25,000 metric tons CO2e per year or more.
* * * * *
    (4) The provisions of paragraphs (i)(1) and (2) of this section 
apply to suppliers subject to subparts LL through QQ of this part by 
substituting the term ``quantity of GHG supplied'' for ``emissions.'' 
For suppliers, the provisions of paragraphs (i)(1) and (2) apply 
individually to each importer and exporter and individually to each 
petroleum refinery, fractionator of natural gas liquids, local natural 
gas distribution company, and producer of CO2, 
N2O, or fluorinated greenhouse gases (e.g., a supplier of 
industrial greenhouse gases might qualify to discontinue reporting as 
an exporter of industrial greenhouse gases but still be required to 
report as an importer; or a company might qualify to discontinue 
reporting as a supplier of industrial greenhouse gases under subpart OO 
of this part but still be required to report as a supplier of carbon 
dioxide under subpart PP of this part).
* * * * *
    (6) If an entire facility or supplier is merged into another 
facility or supplier that is already reporting GHG data under this 
part, then the owner or operator may discontinue complying with this 
part for the facility or supplier, provided that the owner or operator 
submits a notification to the Administrator that announces the 
discontinuation of reporting and the e-GGRT identification number of 
the reconstituted facility no later than March 31 of the year following 
such changes.
* * * * *

0
4. Amend Sec.  98.3 by revising paragraph (h) introductory text and 
paragraph (h)(4) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.3  What are the general monitoring, reporting, recordkeeping 
and verification requirements of this part?

* * * * *
    (h) Annual GHG report revisions. This paragraph applies to the 
reporting years for which the owner or operator is required to maintain 
records for a facility or supplier according to the time periods 
specified in paragraph (g) of this section.
* * * * *
    (4) Notwithstanding paragraphs (h)(1) and (2) of this section, upon 
request by the owner or operator, the Administrator may provide 
reasonable extensions of the 45-day period for submission of the 
revised report or information under paragraphs (h)(1) and (2). If the 
Administrator receives a request for extension of the 45-day period, by 
email to an address prescribed by the Administrator prior to the 
expiration of the 45-day period, the extension request is deemed to be 
automatically granted for 30 days. The Administrator may grant an 
additional extension beyond the automatic 30-day extension if the owner 
or operator submits a request for an additional extension and the 
request is received by the Administrator prior to the expiration of the 
automatic 30-day extension, provided the request demonstrates that it 
is not practicable to submit a revised report or information under 
paragraphs (h)(1) and (2) within 75 days. The Administrator will 
approve the extension request if the request demonstrates to the 
Administrator's satisfaction that it is not practicable to collect and 
process the data needed to resolve potential reporting errors 
identified pursuant to paragraph (h)(1) or (2) within 75 days.
* * * * *

0
5. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.3 by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (c)(4)(iii) introductory text;
0
b. Adding paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(G); and
0
c. Revising paragraphs (c)(5)(ii), (c)(8), and (d)(1)(i).
    The revisions and addition read as follows:

Sec.  98.3  What are the general monitoring, reporting, recordkeeping 
and verification requirements of this part?

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (4) * * *
    (iii) Annual emissions from each applicable source category, 
expressed in metric tons of each applicable GHG listed in paragraphs 
(c)(4)(iii)(A) through (F) of this section.
* * * * *
    (G) For each reported fluorinated GHG and fluorinated heat transfer 
fluid, report the following identifying information:
    (1) Chemical name. If the chemical is not listed in Table A-1 of 
this subpart, then use the method of naming organic chemical compounds 
as recommended by the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry 
(IUPAC).
    (2) The CAS registry number assigned by the Chemical Abstracts 
Registry Service. If a CAS registry number is not assigned or is not 
associated with a single fluorinated GHG or fluorinated heat transfer 
fluid, then report an identification number assigned by EPA's Substance 
Registry Services.
    (3) Linear chemical formula.
* * * * *
    (5) * * *
    (ii) Quantity of each GHG from each applicable supply category in 
Table A-5 to this subpart, expressed in metric tons of each GHG. For 
each reported fluorinated GHG, report the following identifying 
information:
    (A) Chemical name. If the chemical is not listed in Table A-1 of 
this subpart, then use the method of naming organic chemical compounds 
as recommended by the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry 
(IUPAC).
    (B) The CAS registry number assigned by the Chemical Abstracts 
Registry Service. If a CAS registry number is not assigned or is not 
associated with a single fluorinated GHG, then report an identification 
number assigned by EPA's Substance Registry Services.
    (C) Linear chemical formula.
* * * * *
    (8) Each parameter for which a missing data procedure was used 
according to the procedures of an applicable subpart and the total 
number of hours in the year that a missing data procedure was used for 
each parameter. Parameters include not only reported data elements, but 
any data element required for monitoring and calculating emissions.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) Monitoring methods currently used by the facility that do not 
meet the specifications of a relevant subpart.
* * * * *

0
6. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.4 by adding paragraph 
(i)(6) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.4   Authorization and responsibilities of the designated 
representative.

* * * * *
    (i) * * *
    (6) A list of the subparts that the owners and operators anticipate 
will be included in the annual GHG report. The list of potentially 
applicable subparts is required only for an initial certificate of 
representation that is submitted after January 1, 2018 (i.e., for a 
facility or supplier that previously was not registered under this 
part). The list of potentially applicable subparts does not need to be 
revised with revisions to the COR or if the actual applicable subparts 
change.
* * * * *

0
7. Amend Sec.  98.6 by revising the definition for ``Gas collection 
system or landfill gas collection system'' to read as follows:

Sec.  98.6  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Gas collection system or landfill gas collection system means a 
system of

[[Page 89250]]

pipes used to collect landfill gas from different locations in the 
landfill by means of a fan or similar mechanical draft equipment 
(forced convection) to a single location for treatment (thermal 
destruction) or use. Landfill gas collection systems may also include 
knock-out or separator drums and/or a compressor. A single landfill may 
have multiple gas collection systems. Landfill gas collection systems 
do not include ``passive'' systems, whereby landfill gas flows 
naturally (without forced convection) to the surface of the landfill 
where an opening or pipe (vent) is installed to allow for the flow of 
landfill gas to the atmosphere or to a remote flare installed to 
combust landfill gas that is passively emitted from the vent. Landfill 
gas collection systems also do not include ``active venting'' systems, 
whereby landfill gas is conveyed to the surface of the landfill using 
forced convection, but the landfill gas is never recovered or thermally 
destroyed prior to release to the atmosphere.
* * * * *

0
8. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.6 by adding a definition 
for ``Reporting year'' in alphabetical order and revising the 
definition for ``Ventilation hole or shaft'' to read as follows:

Sec.  98.6   Definitions.

* * * * *
    Reporting year means the calendar year during which the GHG data 
are required to be collected for purposes of the annual GHG report. For 
example, reporting year 2014 is January 1, 2014 through December 31, 
2014, and the annual report for reporting year 2014 is submitted to EPA 
on March 31, 2015.
* * * * *
    Ventilation hole or shaft means a vent hole, shaft, mine portal, 
adit or other mine entrance or exits employed at an underground coal 
mine to serve as the outlet or conduit to move air from the ventilation 
system out of the mine.
* * * * *

0
9. Amend Sec.  98.7 by revising paragraph (l)(1) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.7  What standardized methods are incorporated by reference 
into this part?

* * * * *
    (l) * * *
    (1) PH16-V-1, Coal Mine Safety and Health General Inspection 
Procedures Handbook, June 2016, IBR approved for Sec.  98.324(b).
* * * * *

0
10. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.7 by revising paragraph 
(e)(33) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.7  What standardized methods are incorporated by reference 
into this part?

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (33) ASTM D6866-16 Standard Test Methods for Determining the 
Biobased Content of Solid, Liquid, and Gaseous Samples Using 
Radiocarbon Analysis, approved June 1, 2016, IBR approved for 
Sec. Sec.  98.34(d) and (e), and 98.36(e).
* * * * *

0
11. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Table A-3 to subpart A of part 98 
by revising the heading for the entry ``Source Categories Applicable in 
2010 and Future Years'' and the entry for ``Additional Source 
Categories Applicable in 2011 and Future Years'' to read as follows:

    Table A-3 to Subpart A of Part 98--Source Category List for Sec.
                               98.2(a)(1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source Categories \a\ Applicable in Reporting Year 2010 and Future Years
 
                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional Source Categories \a\ Applicable in Reporting Year 2011 and
 Future Years
 
                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source categories are defined in each applicable subpart.

0
12. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Table A-4 to subpart A of part 98 
by revising the heading for the entry for ``Source Categories 
Applicable in 2010 and Future Years'' and the entry for ``Additional 
Source Categories Applicable in 2011 and Future Years'' to read as 
follows:

   Table A-4 to Subpart A--Source Category List for Sec.   98.2(a)(2)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source Categories \a\ Applicable in Reporting Year 2010 and Future Years
 
                              * * * * * * *
Additional Source Categories \a\ Applicable in Reporting Year 2011 and
 Future Years
 
                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source categories are defined in each applicable subpart.

0
13. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Table A-5 to subpart A of part 98:
0
a. By revising the heading for the entry for ``Supplier Categories 
Applicable in 2010 and Future Years'';
0
b. Under the entry for ``Industrial greenhouse gas suppliers (subpart 
OO)'' by adding entries (D) through (G); and
0
c. By revising the entry ``Additional Supplier Categories Applicable in 
2011 and Future Years.''
    The revisions read as follows:

  Table A-5 to Subpart A--Supplier Category List for Sec.   98.2(a)(4)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Supplier Categories \a\ Applicable in Reporting Year 2010 and Future
 Years
 
                              * * * * * * *
    Industrial greenhouse gas suppliers (subpart OO):

[[Page 89251]]

 
 
                              * * * * * * *
        (D) Starting with reporting year 2018, all producers of
         fluorinated heat transfer fluids.
        (E) Starting with reporting year 2018, importers of fluorinated
         heat transfer fluids with annual bulk imports of N2O,
         fluorinated GHG, fluorinated heat transfer fluids, and CO2 that
         in combination are equivalent to 25,000 metric tons CO2e or
         more.
        (F) Starting with reporting year 2018, exporters of fluorinated
         heat transfer fluids with annual bulk exports of N2O,
         fluorinated GHG, fluorinated heat transfer fluids, and CO2 that
         in combination are equivalent to 25,000 metric tons CO2e or
         more.
        (G) Starting with reporting year 2018, facilities that destroy
         25,000 mtCO2e or more of fluorinated GHGs or fluorinated heat
         transfer fluids annually.
 
                              * * * * * * *
Additional Supplier Categories Applicable \a\ in Reporting Year 2011 and
 Future Years
 
                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Suppliers are defined in each applicable subpart.

Subpart C--General Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources

0
14. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.33 in paragraph 
(a)(2)(ii)(A) by revising parameters ``(HHV)I,'' 
``(Fuel)I,'' and ``n'' of Equation C-2b and revising 
paragraphs (a)(5)(i)(C), (a)(5)(ii)(C), and (a)(5)(iii)(C) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.33  Calculating GHG emissions.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (A) * * *
* * * * *

(HHV)I = Measured high heat value of the fuel, for sample 
period ``i'' (which may be the arithmetic average of multiple 
determinations), or, if applicable, an appropriate substitute data 
value (mmBtu per mass or volume).
(Fuel)I = Mass or volume of the fuel combusted during the 
sample period ``i,'' (e.g., monthly, quarterly, semi-annually, or by 
lot) from company records (express mass in short tons for solid 
fuel, volume in standard cubic feet (e.g., for gaseous fuel, and 
volume in gallons for liquid fuel).
n = Number of sample periods in the year.

* * * * *
    (5) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (C) Divide the cumulative annual CO2 mass emissions 
value by 1.1023 to convert it to metric tons.
    (ii) * * *
    (C) Divide the cumulative annual CO2 mass emissions 
value by 1.1023 to convert it to metric tons.
    (iii) * * *
    (C) Divide the cumulative annual CO2 mass emissions 
value by 1.1023 to convert it to metric tons.
* * * * *

0
15. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.34 by revising paragraphs 
(d) and (e) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.34  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

* * * * *
    (d) Except as otherwise provided in Sec.  98.33(b)(1)(vi) and 
(vii), when municipal solid waste (MSW) is either the primary fuel 
combusted in a unit or the only fuel with a biogenic component 
combusted in the unit, determine the biogenic portion of the 
CO2 emissions using ASTM D6866-16 Standard Test Methods for 
Determining the Biobased Content of Solid, Liquid, and Gaseous Samples 
Using Radiocarbon Analysis) and ASTM D7459-08 Standard Practice for 
Collection of Integrated Samples for the Speciation of Biomass 
(Biogenic) and Fossil-Derived Carbon Dioxide Emitted from Stationary 
Emissions Sources (both incorporated by reference, see Sec.  98.7). 
Perform the ASTM D7459-08 sampling and the ASTM D6866-16 analysis at 
least once in every calendar quarter in which MSW is combusted in the 
unit. Collect each gas sample during normal unit operating conditions 
for at least 24 total (not necessarily consecutive) hours, or longer if 
the facility deems it necessary to obtain a representative sample. 
Notwithstanding this requirement, if the types of fuels combusted and 
their relative proportions are consistent throughout the year, the 
minimum required sampling time may be reduced to 8 hours if at least 
two 8-hour samples and one 24-hour sample are collected under normal 
operating conditions, and arithmetic average of the biogenic fraction 
of the flue gas from the 8-hour samples (expressed as a decimal) is 
within 5 percent of the biogenic fraction from the 24-hour 
test. There must be no overlapping of the 8-hour and 24-hour test 
periods. Document the results of the demonstration in the unit's 
monitoring plan. If the types of fuels and their relative proportions 
are not consistent throughout the year, an optional sampling approach 
that facilities may wish to consider to obtain a more representative 
sample is to collect an integrated sample by extracting a small amount 
of flue gas (e.g., 1 to 5 cc) in each unit operating hour during the 
quarter. Separate the total annual CO2 emissions into the 
biogenic and non-biogenic fractions using the average proportion of 
biogenic emissions of all samples analyzed during the reporting year. 
Express the results as a decimal fraction (e.g., 0.30, if 30 percent of 
the CO2 is biogenic). When MSW is the primary fuel for 
multiple units at the facility, and the units are fed from a common 
fuel source, testing at only one of the units is sufficient.
    (e) For other units that combust combinations of biomass fuel(s) 
(or heterogeneous fuels that have a biomass component, e.g., tires) and 
fossil (or other non-biogenic) fuel(s), in any proportions, ASTM D6866-
16 and ASTM D7459-08 (both incorporated by reference, see Sec.  98.7) 
may be used to determine the biogenic portion of the CO2 
emissions in every calendar quarter in which biomass and non-biogenic 
fuels are co-fired in the unit. Follow the procedures in paragraph (d) 
of this section. If the primary fuel for multiple units at the facility 
consists of tires, and the units are fed from a common fuel source, 
testing at only one of the units is sufficient.
* * * * *

0
16. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.36 by adding paragraphs 
(c)(1)(iii) and (c)(3)(ii) and revising paragraphs (e)(2)(i), (e)(2)(x) 
introductory text, and (e)(2)(xi) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.36  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iii) Cumulative maximum rated heat input capacity of the group 
(mmBtu/hr). The cumulative maximum rated heat input capacity shall be 
determined as the sum of the maximum rated heat

[[Page 89252]]

input capacities for all units in the group, excluding units less than 
10 (mmBtu/hr).
* * * * *
    (3) * * *
    (ii) Cumulative maximum rated heat input capacity of the units 
served by the common pipe (mmBtu/hr). The cumulative maximum rated heat 
input capacity shall be determined as the sum of the maximum rated heat 
input capacities for all units served by the common pipe, excluding 
units less than 10 (mmBtu/hr).
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) For the Tier 1 Calculation Methodology, report:
    (A) The total quantity of each type of fuel combusted in the unit 
or group of aggregated units (as applicable) during the reporting year, 
in short tons for solid fuels, gallons for liquid fuels and standard 
cubic feet for gaseous fuels, or, if applicable, therms or mmBtu for 
natural gas.
    (B) If applicable, the moisture content used to calculate the wood 
and wood residuals wet basis HHV for use in Equations C-1 and C-8 of 
this subpart, in percent.
* * * * *
    (x) When ASTM methods D7459-08 and D6866-16 (both incorporated by 
reference, see Sec.  98.7) are used to determine the biogenic portion 
of the annual CO2 emissions from MSW combustion, as 
described in Sec.  98.34(d), report:
* * * * *
    (xi) When ASTM methods D7459-08 and D6866-16 (both incorporated by 
reference, see Sec.  98.7) are used in accordance with Sec.  98.34(e) 
to determine the biogenic portion of the annual CO2 
emissions from a unit that co-fires biogenic fuels (or partly-biogenic 
fuels, including tires if you are electing to report biogenic 
CO2 emissions from tire combustion) and non-biogenic fuels, 
you shall report the results of each quarterly sample analysis, 
expressed as a decimal fraction (e.g., if the biogenic fraction of the 
CO2 emissions is 30 percent, report 0.30).
* * * * *

0
17. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.37 by revising paragraph 
(a) and adding paragraph (b)(37) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.37  Records that must be retained.

* * * * *
    (a) The applicable records specified in Sec. Sec.  98.34(f), 
98.35(b), and 98.36(e).
    (b) * * *
    (37) Moisture content used to calculate the wood and wood residuals 
wet basis HHV (percent), if applicable (Equations C-1 and C-8 of this 
subpart).

0
18. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Table C-1 to subpart C of part 98 
by:
0
a. Removing the entries ``Petroleum Coke'' under ``Petroleum 
products'', ``Petroleum Coke'' under ``Other fuels--solid'', and 
``Propane Gas'' under ``Other fuels--gaseous'';
0
b. Removing the heading ``Petroleum products'' in the ``Fuel type'' 
column and adding in its place the heading ``Petroleum products--
liquid''; and
0
c. Adding heading ``Petroleum products--solid'' and its entry 
``Petroleum Coke'', and heading ``Petroleum products--gaseous'', and 
its entry ``Propane Gas'' after the entry ``Crude Oil''.
    The additions read as follows:

Table C-1 to Subpart C of Part 98--Default CO2 Emission Factors and High
                  Heat Values for Various Types of Fuel
 [Default CO2 emission factors and high heat values for various types of
                                  fuel]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Default high heat   Default CO2 emission
           Fuel type                  value                factor
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                              * * * * * * *
Petroleum products--solid.....  mmBtu/short ton..  kg CO2/mmBtu
Petroleum Coke................  30.00............  102.41
Petroleum products--gaseous...  mmBtu/scf........  kg CO2/mmBtu
Petroleum products--liquid....  mmBtu/gallon.....  kg CO2/mmBtu
Propane Gas...................  2.516 x 10-3.....  61.46
 
                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

Table C-2 to Subpart C of Part 98 [Amended]

0
19. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Table C-2 to subpart C of part 98 
by:
0
a. Removing from the ``Fuel type'' column, the entry ``Petroleum (All 
fuel types in Table C-1)'' and adding in its place the entry 
``Petroleum Products (All fuel types in Table C-1)'';
0
b. Removing from the ``Fuel type'' column, the entry ``Municipal Solid 
Waste'' and adding in its place the entry ``Other Fuels--Solid''; and
0
c. Removing the entry ``Tires''.

Subpart E--Adipic Acid Production

0
20. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.53 by revising paragraph 
(a)(2) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.53  Calculating GHG emissions.

    (a) * * *
    (2) Request Administrator approval for an alternative method of 
determining N2O emissions according to paragraphs (a)(2)(i) 
through (iv) of this section.
    (i) If you received Administrator approval for an alternative 
method of determining N2O emissions in the previous 
reporting year and your methodology is unchanged, your alternative 
method is automatically approved for the next reporting year.
    (ii) You must notify the EPA of your use of a previously approved 
alternative method in your annual report.
    (iii) Otherwise, you must submit the request within 45 days 
following promulgation of this subpart or within the first 30 days of 
each subsequent reporting year.
    (iv) If the Administrator does not approve your requested 
alternative method within 150 days of the end of the reporting year, 
you must determine the N2O emissions for the current 
reporting period using the procedures specified in paragraph (a)(1) of 
this section.
* * * * *

[[Page 89253]]

0
21. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.56 by revising paragraph 
(f) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.56  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (f) Types of abatement technologies used and date of installation 
for each (if applicable).
* * * * *

Subpart F--Aluminum Production

0
22. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.65 by revising paragraph 
(a) introductory text and removing Equation F-8 and adding Equation F-9 
in its place to read as follows:

Sec.  98.65  Procedures for estimating missing data.

* * * * *
    (a) Where anode or paste consumption data are missing, 
CO2 emissions can be estimated from aluminum production by 
using Equation F-9 of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE16.018

* * * * *

0
23. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.66 by adding paragraph 
(c)(2) and revising paragraph (c)(3) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.66  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) Anode effect minutes per cell-day (AE-mins/cell-day), anode 
effect frequency (AE/cell-day), anode effect duration (minutes). (Or 
anode effect overvoltage factor ((kg CF4/metric ton Al)/(mV/cell day)), 
potline overvoltage (mV/cell day), current efficiency (%)).
    (3) Smelter-specific slope coefficients (or overvoltage emission 
factors) and the last date when the smelter-specific slope coefficients 
(or overvoltage emission factors) were measured.
* * * * *

Subpart G--Ammonia Manufacturing

0
24. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.74 by adding paragraph 
(f) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.74  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

* * * * *
    (f) You may use company records or an engineering estimate to 
determine the annual ammonia production and the annual methanol 
production.
* * * * *

0
25. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.76 by revising paragraph 
(a) introductory text, adding paragraphs (a)(3) and (b)(2) and (7), and 
revising paragraph (b)(15) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.76  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (a) If a CEMS is used to measure CO2 emissions, then you 
must report the relevant information required under Sec.  98.36 for the 
Tier 4 Calculation Methodology and the information in paragraphs (a)(1) 
through (3) of this section:
* * * * *
    (3) Annual ammonia production (metric tons, sum of all process 
units reported within subpart G of this part).
    (b) * * *
    (2) Annual quantity of each type of feedstock consumed for ammonia 
manufacturing (scf of feedstock or gallons of feedstock or kg of 
feedstock).
* * * * *
    (7) Annual average carbon content of each type of feedstock 
consumed.
* * * * *
    (15) Annual quantity of methanol intentionally produced as a 
desired product, for each process unit (metric tons).

Subpart I--Electronics Manufacturing

0
26. Amend Sec.  98.93 by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a)(1) introductory text;
0
b. Revising Equation I-9 in paragraph (a)(1);
0
c. Revising parameters ``Nil'' and ``Fil'' of 
Equation I-12 in paragraph (d);
0
d. Revising paragraphs (i)(1)(ii) and (iv);
0
e. Revising Equation I-17 in paragraph (i)(3)(ii);
0
f. Revising parameter ``dif'' of Equation I-19 in paragraph 
(i)(3)(ii);
0
g. Revising parameter ``dkf'' of Equation I-20 in paragraph 
(i)(3)(iv);
0
h. Revising parameter ``dif'' of Equation I-21 in paragraph 
(i)(3)(v);
0
i. Revising parameter ``dkf'' of Equation I-22 in paragraph 
(i)(3)(vi); and
0
j. Revising paragraph (i)(3)(viii) and paragraph (i)(4) introductory 
text.
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.93  Calculating GHG emissions.

    (a) * * *
    (1) If you manufacture semiconductors, you must adhere to the 
procedures in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section. You 
must calculate annual emissions of each input gas and of each by-
product gas using Equations I-6 and I-7 of this subpart, respectively. 
If your fab uses less than 50 kg of a fluorinated GHG in one reporting 
year, you may calculate emissions as equal to your fab's annual 
consumption for that specific gas as calculated in Equation I-11 of 
this subpart, plus any by-product emissions of that gas calculated 
under paragraph (a) of this section.
* * * * *
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE16.019

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
* * * * *
Nil = Number of containers of size and type l used at the 
fab and returned to the gas distributor containing the standard heel 
of input gas i.
Fil = Full capacity of containers of size and type l 
containing input gas i (kg).
* * * * *
    (i) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (ii) You must use representative data from the previous reporting 
year to estimate the consumption of input gas i as calculated in 
Equation I-13 of this subpart and the fraction of input gas i and by-
product gas k destroyed in abatement systems for each stack system as 
calculated by Equations I-24A and I-24B of this subpart. If you were 
not required to submit an annual report under subpart I for the 
previous reporting year and data from the previous reporting year are 
not

[[Page 89254]]

available, you may estimate the consumption of input gas i and the 
fraction of input gas i destroyed in abatement systems based on 
representative operating data from a period of at least 30 days in the 
current reporting year. When calculating the consumption of input gas i 
using Equation I-13 of this subpart, the term ``fij'' is 
replaced with the ratio of the number of tools using input gas i that 
are vented to the stack system for which you are calculating the 
preliminary estimate to the total number of tools in the fab using 
input gas i, expressed as a decimal fraction. You may use this approach 
to determining fij only for this preliminary estimate.
* * * * *
    (iv) If you anticipate an increase or decrease in annual 
consumption or emissions of any fluorinated GHG, or the number of tools 
connected to abatement systems greater than 10 percent for the current 
reporting year compared to the previous reporting year, you must 
account for the anticipated change in your preliminary estimate. You 
may account for such a change using a quantifiable metric (e.g., the 
ratio of the number of tools that are expected to be vented to the 
stack system in the current year as compared to the previous reporting 
year, ratio of the expected number of wafer starts in the current 
reporting year as compared to the previous reporting year), engineering 
judgment, or other industry standard practice.
* * * * *
    (3) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE16.001
    
* * * * *
    (iii) * * *
* * * * *

dif = Fraction of fluorinated GHG input gas i destroyed 
or removed in abatement systems connected to process tools in fab f, 
as calculated in Equation I-24A of this subpart (expressed as 
decimal fraction). If the stack system does not have abatement 
systems on the tools vented to the stack system, the value of this 
parameter is zero.
* * * * *
    (iv) * * *
* * * * *
dkf = Fraction of fluorinated GHG by-product gas k 
destroyed or removed in abatement systems connected to process tools 
in fab f, as calculated in Equation I-24B of this subpart (expressed 
as decimal fraction).
* * * * *
    (v) * * *
* * * * *
dif = Fraction of fluorinated GHG input gas i destroyed 
or removed in abatement systems connected to process tools in fab f 
that are included in the stack testing option, as calculated in 
Equation I-24A of this subpart (expressed as decimal fraction).
* * * * *
    (vi) * * *
* * * * *
dkf = Fraction of fluorinated GHG by-product k destroyed 
or removed in abatement systems connected to process tools in fab f 
that are included in the stack testing option, as calculated in 
Equation I-24B of this subpart (expressed as decimal fraction).
* * * * *
    (viii) When using the stack testing option described in paragraph 
(i) of this section, you must calculate the weighted-average fraction 
of each fluorinated input gas i and each fluorinated byproduct gas k 
destroyed or removed in abatement systems for each fab f, as 
applicable, by using Equation I-24A (for input gases) and Equation I-
24B (for by-product gases) of this subpart.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE16.002

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE16.003

Where:

dif = The average weighted fraction of fluorinated GHG 
input gas i destroyed or removed in abatement systems in fab f 
(expressed as a decimal fraction).
dkf = The average weighted fraction of fluorinated GHG 
by-product gas k destroyed or removed in abatement systems in fab f 
(expressed as a decimal fraction).
Cijf = The amount of fluorinated GHG input gas i consumed 
for process type or sub-type j fed into abatement systems in fab f 
as calculated using Equation I-13 of this subpart (kg).
(1-Uij) = The default emission factor for input gas i 
used in process type or sub-type j, from applicable Tables I-3 
through I-7 of this subpart.
Bijk = The default byproduct gas formation rate factor 
for by-product gas k from input gas i used in process type or sub-
type j, from applicable Tables I-3 through I-7 of this subpart.
DREij = Destruction or removal efficiency for fluorinated 
GHG input gas i in abatement systems connected to process tools 
where process type or sub-type j is used (expressed as a decimal 
fraction) determined according to Sec.  98.94(f).
DREjk = Destruction or removal efficiency for fluorinated 
GHG by-product gas k in abatement systems connected to process tools 
where input gas i is used in process type or sub-type j (expressed 
as a decimal fraction) determined according to Sec.  98.94(f).
f = fab.
i = Fluorinated GHG input gas.
j = Process type or sub-type.

    (4) Method to calculate emissions from stack systems that are not 
tested. You must calculate annual fab-level emissions of each 
fluorinated GHG input gas and byproduct gas for those fluorinated GHG 
listed in paragraphs (i)(4)(i) and (ii) of this section using default 
utilization and by-product formation rates as shown in Table I-11, I-
12, I-13, I-14, or I-15 of this subpart, as applicable, and by using 
Equations I-8, I-9, and I-13 of this subpart. When using Equations I-8, 
I-9, and I-13 to fulfill the requirements of this paragraph, you must 
use, in place of the term Cij in each equation, the total 
consumption of each fluorinated GHG

[[Page 89255]]

meeting the criteria in paragraph (i)(4)(i) of this section or that is 
used in tools vented to the stack systems that meet the criteria in 
paragraph (i)(4)(ii) of this section. You must use, in place of the 
term aij, the fraction of fluorinated GHG meeting the 
criteria in paragraph (i)(4)(i) of this section used in tools with 
abatement systems or that is used in tools with abatement systems that 
are vented to the stack systems that meet the criteria in paragraph 
(i)(4)(ii) of this section. You also must use the results of Equations 
I-24A and I-24B of this subpart in place of the terms dij in 
Equation I-8 and djk in Equation I-9, respectively, and use 
the results of Equation I-23 of this subpart in place of the results of 
Equation I-15 of this subpart for the term UTij.
* * * * *

0
27. Amend Sec.  98.94 by revising paragraphs (f) introductory text and 
(j)(5)(ii) introductory text to read as follows:

Sec.  98.94  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

* * * * *
    (f) If your fab employs abatement systems and you elect to reflect 
emission reductions due to these systems, or if your fab employs 
abatement systems designed for fluorinated GHG abatement and you elect 
to calculate fluorinated GHG emissions using the stack test method 
under Sec.  98.93(i), you must comply with the requirements of 
paragraphs (f)(1) through (3) of this section. If you use an average of 
properly measured destruction or removal efficiencies for a gas and 
process sub-type or process type combination, as applicable, in your 
emission calculations under Sec.  98.93(a), (b), and/or (i), you must 
also adhere to procedures in paragraph (f)(4) of this section.
* * * * *
    (j) * * *
    (5) * * *
    (ii) Criteria to test less frequently. After the first 3 years of 
annual testing, you may calculate the relative standard deviation of 
the emission factors for each fluorinated GHG included in the test and 
use that analysis to determine the frequency of any future testing. As 
an alternative, you may conduct all three tests in less than 3 calendar 
years for purposes of this paragraph (j)(5)(ii), but this does not 
relieve you of the obligation to conduct subsequent annual testing if 
you do not meet the criteria to test less frequently. If the criteria 
specified in paragraphs (j)(5)(ii)(A) and (B) of this section are met, 
you may use the arithmetic average of the three emission factors for 
each fluorinated GHG and fluorinated GHG byproduct for the current year 
and the next 4 years with no further testing unless your fab operations 
are changed in a way that triggers the re-test criteria in paragraph 
(j)(8) of this section. In the fifth year following the last stack test 
included in the previous average, you must test each of the stack 
systems for which testing is required and repeat the relative standard 
deviation analysis using the results of the most recent three tests 
(i.e., the new test and the two previous tests conducted prior to the 
4-year period). If the criteria specified in paragraphs (j)(5)(ii)(A) 
and (B) of this section are not met, you must use the emission factors 
developed from the most recent testing and continue annual testing. You 
may conduct more than one test in the same year, but each set of 
emissions testing for a stack system must be separated by a period of 
at least 2 months. You may repeat the relative standard deviation 
analysis using the most recent three tests, including those tests 
conducted prior to the 4-year period, to determine if you are exempt 
from testing for the next 4 years.
* * * * *

0
28. Amend Sec.  98.96 by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (c)(2), (d), and (e);
0
b. Revising parameters ``dif'' and ``dkf'' of 
Equation I-28 in paragraph (r)(2); and
0
c. Revising paragraph (y)(2)(iv).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.96  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) When you use the procedures specified in Sec.  98.93(a), each 
fluorinated GHG emitted from each process type or process sub-type as 
calculated in Equations I-8 and I-9 of this subpart, as applicable.
* * * * *
    (d) The method of emissions calculation used in Sec.  98.93 for 
each fab.
    (e) Annual production in terms of substrate surface area (e.g., 
silicon, PV-cell, glass) for each fab, including specification of the 
substrate.
* * * * *
    (r) * * *
    (2) * * *
* * * * *
dif = Fraction of fluorinated GHG i destroyed or removed 
in abatement systems connected to process tools in fab f, as 
calculated from Equation I-24A of this subpart, which you used to 
calculate total emissions according to the procedures in Sec.  
98.93(i)(3) (expressed as a decimal fraction).
* * * * *
dkf = Fraction of fluorinated GHG byproduct k destroyed 
or removed in abatement systems connected to process tools in fab f, 
as calculated from Equation I-24B of this subpart, which you used to 
calculate total emissions according to the procedures in Sec.  
98.93(i)(3) (expressed as a decimal fraction).
* * * * *
    (y) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iv) It must provide any utilization and byproduct formation rates 
and/or destruction or removal efficiency data that have been collected 
in the previous 3 years that support the changes in semiconductor 
manufacturing processes described in the report. For any utilization or 
byproduct formation rate data submitted, the report must include the 
input gases used and measured, the utilization rates measured, the 
byproduct formation rates measured, the process type, the process 
subtype for chamber clean processes, the wafer size, and the methods 
used for the measurements. For any destruction or removal efficiency 
data submitted, the report must include the input gases used and 
measured, the destruction and removal efficiency measured, the process 
type, and the methods used for the measurements.
* * * * *

0
29. Amend Sec.  98.97 by revising paragraphs (d)(5) introductory text 
and (d)(7) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.97   Records that must be retained.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (5) In addition to the inventory specified in Sec.  98.96(p), the 
information in paragraphs (d)(5)(i) through (iii) of this section:
* * * * *
    (7) Records of all inputs and results of calculations made to 
determine the average weighted fraction of each gas destroyed or 
removed in the abatement systems for each stack system using Equations 
I-24A and I-24B of this subpart, if applicable. The inputs should 
include an indication of whether each value for destruction or removal 
efficiency is a default value or a measured site-specific value.
* * * * *

0
30. Revise Table I-3 of subpart I to read as follows:

[[Page 89256]]

 Table I-3 to Subpart I of Part 98--Default Emission Factors (1-Uij) for Gas Utilization Rates (Uij) and By-Product Formation Rates (Bijk) for Semiconductor Manufacturing for 150 mm and 200 mm
                                                                                           Wafer Sizes
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                          Process gas i
                     Process type/sub-type                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   CF4      C2F6      CHF3      CH2F2     C2HF5     CH3F      C3F8      C4F8       NF3       SF6      C4F6      C5F8      C4F8O
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Etching/Wafer Cleaning
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-Ui..........................................................      0.81      0.72      0.51      0.13     0.064      0.70        NA      0.14      0.19      0.55      0.17     0.072        NA
BCF4..........................................................        NA      0.10     0.085     0.079     0.077        NA        NA      0.11    0.0040      0.13      0.13        NA        NA
BC2F6.........................................................     0.046        NA     0.030     0.025     0.024    0.0034        NA     0.037     0.025      0.11      0.11     0.014        NA
BC4F6.........................................................        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA
BC4F8.........................................................        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA
BC3F8.........................................................        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA
BC5F8.........................................................    0.0012        NA    0.0012        NA        NA        NA        NA    0.0086        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA
BCHF3.........................................................      0.10     0.047        NA     0.049        NA        NA        NA     0.040        NA    0.0012     0.066    0.0039        NA
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                        Chamber Cleaning
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    In situ plasma cleaning:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-Ui..........................................................      0.92      0.55        NA        NA        NA        NA      0.40      0.10      0.18        NA        NA        NA      0.14
BCF4..........................................................        NA      0.21        NA        NA        NA        NA      0.20      0.11     0.050        NA        NA        NA      0.13
BC2F6.........................................................        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA     0.045
BC3F8.........................................................        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Remote plasma cleaning:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-Ui..........................................................        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA     0.017        NA        NA        NA        NA
BCF4..........................................................        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA     0.015        NA        NA        NA        NA
BC2F6.........................................................        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA
BC3F8.........................................................        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    In situ thermal cleaning:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-Ui..........................................................        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA
BCF4..........................................................        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA
BC2F6.........................................................        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA
BC3F8.........................................................        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA        NA
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: NA = Not applicable; i.e., there are no applicable default emission factor measurements for this gas. This does not necessarily imply that a particular gas is not used in or emitted
  from a particular process sub-type or process type.

0
31. Revise Table I-4 of subpart I to read as follows:

 Table I-4 to Subpart I of Part 98--Default Emission Factors (1-Uij) for Gas Utilization Rates (Uij) and By-Product Formation Rates (Bijk) for Semiconductor Manufacturing for 300 mm and 450 mm
                                                                                           Wafer Size
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                         Process gas i
                    Process type/sub-type                    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 CF4        C2F6       CHF3      CH2F2       CH3F       C3F8       C4F8       NF3        SF6        C4F6       C5F8      C4F8O
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Etching/Wafer Cleaning
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-Ui........................................................       0.65       0.80       0.42       0.21       0.33       0.30       0.18       0.15       0.32       0.15       0.10         NA
BCF4........................................................         NA       0.21      0.095      0.049      0.045       0.21      0.045      0.046      0.040      0.059       0.11         NA
BC2F6.......................................................      0.079         NA      0.064      0.052    0.00087       0.18      0.031      0.045      0.044      0.074      0.083         NA
BC4F6.......................................................         NA         NA    0.00010         NA         NA         NA      0.018         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA
BC4F8.......................................................    0.00063         NA    0.00080         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA
BC3F8.......................................................         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA    0.00012         NA
BCHF3.......................................................      0.011         NA         NA      0.050     0.0057      0.012      0.027      0.025     0.0037      0.019     0.0069         NA
BCH2F2......................................................         NA         NA     0.0036         NA     0.0023         NA     0.0015    0.00086   0.000029   0.000030         NA         NA
BCH3F.......................................................     0.0080         NA     0.0080     0.0080         NA    0.00073         NA     0.0080         NA         NA         NA         NA
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                        Chamber Cleaning
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    In situ plasma cleaning:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-Ui........................................................         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA       0.23         NA         NA         NA         NA
BCF4........................................................         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA      0.037         NA         NA         NA         NA
BC2F6.......................................................         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA
BC3F8.......................................................         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Remote Plasma Cleaning:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-Ui........................................................         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA      0.063         NA      0.017         NA         NA         NA         NA
BCF4........................................................         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA      0.075         NA         NA         NA         NA
BC2F6.......................................................         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA
BC3F8.......................................................         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 89257]]

 
                                                                                    In Situ Thermal Cleaning:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-Ui........................................................         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA       0.28         NA         NA         NA         NA
BCF4........................................................         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA      0.010         NA         NA         NA         NA
BC2F6.......................................................         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA
BC3F8.......................................................         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA         NA
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: NA = Not applicable; i.e., there are no applicable default emission factor measurements for this gas. This does not necessarily imply that a particular gas is not used in or emitted
  from a particular process sub-type or process type.

Subpart N--Glass Production

0
32. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.144 by revising 
paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.144   Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) Unless you use the default value of 1.0, you must measure 
carbonate-based mineral mass fractions at least annually to verify the 
mass fraction data provided by the supplier of the raw material; such 
measurements shall be based on sampling and chemical analysis using 
consensus standards that specify X-ray fluorescence. For measurements 
made in years prior to the emissions reporting year 2014, you may also 
use ASTM D3682-01 (Reapproved 2006) Standard Test Method for Major and 
Minor Elements in Combustion Residues from Coal Utilization Processes 
or ASTM D6349-09 Standard Test Method for Determination of Major and 
Minor Elements in Coal, Coke, and Solid Residues from Combustion of 
Coal and Coke by Inductively Coupled Plasma--Atomic Emission 
Spectrometry (both incorporated by reference, see Sec.  98.7).
    (c) Unless you use the default value of 1.0, you must determine the 
annual average mass fraction for the carbonate-based mineral in each 
carbonate-based raw material by calculating an arithmetic average of 
the monthly data obtained from raw material suppliers or sampling and 
chemical analysis.
    (d) Unless you use the default value of 1.0, you must determine on 
an annual basis the calcination fraction for each carbonate consumed 
based on sampling and chemical analysis using an industry consensus 
standard. If performed, this chemical analysis must be conducted using 
an x-ray fluorescence test or other enhanced testing method published 
by an industry consensus standards organization (e.g., ASTM, ASME, API, 
etc.).

0
33. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.146 by revising 
paragraphs (b)(5) introductory text and (b)(7) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.146   Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (5) Results of all tests, if applicable, used to verify the 
carbonate-based mineral mass fraction for each carbonate-based raw 
material charged to a continuous glass melting furnace, as specified in 
paragraphs (b)(5)(i) through (iii) of this section.
* * * * *
    (7) Method used to determine decimal fraction of calcination, 
unless you used the default value of 1.0.
* * * * *

0
34. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.147 by revising 
paragraphs (b)(3), (b)(4) introductory text, and (d)(2) and (3) to read 
as follows:

Sec.  98.147   Records that must be retained.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) Data on carbonate-based mineral mass fractions provided by the 
raw material supplier for all raw materials consumed annually and 
included in calculating process emissions in Equation N-1 of this 
subpart, if applicable.
    (4) Results of all tests, if applicable, used to verify the 
carbonate-based mineral mass fraction for each carbonate-based raw 
material charged to a continuous glass melting furnace, including the 
data specified in paragraphs (b)(4)(i) through (v) of this section.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) Annual amount of each carbonate-based raw material charged to 
each continuous glass melting furnace (tons) (Equation N-1 of this 
subpart).
    (3) Decimal fraction of calcination achieved for each carbonate-
based raw material for each continuous glass melting furnace (specify 
the default value, if used, or the value determined according to Sec.  
98.144) (percentage, expressed as a decimal) (Equation N-1 of this 
subpart).

Subpart O--HCFC-22 Production and HFC-23 Destruction

0
35. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.156 by revising 
paragraphs (a) introductory text and (d) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.156   Data reporting requirements.

    (a) In addition to the information required by Sec.  98.3(c), the 
HCFC-22 production facility shall report the following information for 
each HCFC-22 production process:
* * * * *
    (d) If the HFC-23 concentration measured pursuant to Sec.  
98.154(l) is greater than that measured during the performance test 
that is the basis for the destruction efficiency (DE), the facility 
shall report the method used to calculate the revised destruction 
efficiency, specifying whether Sec.  98.154(l)(1) or (2) has been used 
for the calculation.
* * * * *

Subpart P--Hydrogen Production

0
36. Effective January 1, 2019, amend Sec.  98.163 by revising parameter 
``CO2'' of Equation P-3 in paragraph (b)(3) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.163  Calculating GHG emissions.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) * * *
* * * * *
CO2 = Annual CO2 emissions from fuel and 
feedstock consumption (metric tons/yr).
* * * * *

0
37. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.164 by revising paragraph 
(b)(1) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.164  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

* * * * *

[[Page 89258]]

    (b) * * *
    (1) Calibrate all oil and gas flow meters that are used to measure 
liquid and gaseous fuel and feedstock volumes (except for gas billing 
meters) according to the monitoring and QA/QC requirements for the Tier 
3 methodology in Sec.  98.34(b)(1). Perform oil tank drop measurements 
(if used to quantify liquid fuel or feedstock consumption) according to 
Sec.  98.34(b)(2). Calibrate all solids weighing equipment according to 
the procedures in Sec.  98.3(i).
* * * * *

0
38. Effective January 1, 2019, amend Sec.  98.166 by revising 
paragraphs (b)(4), (d), and (e) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.166   Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) Annual quantity of ammonia intentionally produced as a desired 
product, if applicable (metric tons).
* * * * *
    (d) Annual quantity of carbon other than CO2 collected 
and transferred off site in either gas, liquid, or solid forms (kg 
carbon), excluding methanol.
    (e) Annual quantity of methanol intentionally produced as a desired 
product, if applicable, (metric tons) for each process unit.

Subpart Q--Iron and Steel Production

0
39. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.173 by revising Equation 
Q-5 in paragraph (b)(1)(v) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.173   Calculating GHG emissions.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (v) * * *
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE16.004
    
* * * * *

0
40. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.176 by revising Equation 
Q-10 in paragraph (e)(6)(ii), Equation Q-11 in paragraph (e)(6)(iii), 
Equation Q-12 in paragraph (e)(6)(iv), and the parameter ``n'' of 
Equation Q-12 in paragraph (e)(6)(iv) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.176   Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (6) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE16.005
    
* * * * *
    (iii) * * *
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE16.006
    
* * * * *
    (iv) * * *
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE16.007
    
* * * * *
n = Number of gaseous, liquid, and solid fuel inputs to each process 
unit as used in Equation Q-9 of this section.
* * * * *

Subpart S--Lime Manufacturing

0
41. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.193 by revising paragraph 
(b)(2) introductory text and adding paragraphs (b)(2)(vi) through 
(viii) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.193   Calculating GHG emissions.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) Calculate and report process and combustion CO2 
emissions from all lime kilns separately using the procedures specified 
in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (viii) of this section.
* * * * *
    (vi) You must calculate an annual average emission factor for each 
type of lime product produced using Equation S-5 of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE16.008

Where:

EFLIME,i,avg = Annual average emission factor for lime 
type i, (metric tons CO2/ton lime)
EFLIME,i,n = Emission factor for lime type i, for 
calendar month n (metric tons CO2/ton lime) from Equation 
S-1 of this section.
n = Number of calendar months with calculated EFLIME,i,n 
value used to calculate annual emission factor.

    (vii) You must calculate an annual average emission factor for each 
type of calcined byproduct/waste by lime type that is sold using 
Equation S-6 of this section.

[[Page 89259]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE16.009

Where:

EFLKD,i,avg = Annual average emission factor for calcined 
lime byproduct/waste type i sold (metric tons CO2/ton 
lime byproduct).
EFLKD,i,n = Emission factor for calcined lime byproduct/
waste type i sold, for calendar month n (metric tons CO2/
ton lime byproduct) from Equation S-2 of this section.
n = Number of calendar months with calculated EFLKD,i,n 
value used to calculate annual emission factor.

    (viii) You must calculate an annual average result of chemical 
composition analysis of each type of lime product produced and calcined 
byproduct/waste sold using Equations S-7 through S-10 of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE16.010

Where

CaOi,avg = Annual average calcium oxide content for lime 
type i (metric tons CaO/metric ton lime).
CaOi,n = Calcium oxide content for lime type i, for 
calendar month n, determined according to Sec.  98.194(c) for 
Equation S-1 of this section (metric tons CaO/metric ton lime).
n = Number of calendar months with calculated CaO,i,n 
value used to calculate annual average calcium oxide content.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE16.011

Where:

MgOi,avg = Annual average magnesium oxide content for 
lime type i (metric tons MgO/metric ton lime).
MgOi,n = Magnesium oxide content for lime type i, for 
calendar month n, determined according to Sec.  98.194(c) for 
Equation S-1 of this section (metric tons MgO/metric ton lime).
n = Number of calendar months with calculated MgO,i,n 
value used to calculate annual average magnesium oxide content.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE16.012

Where:

CaOLKD,i,avg = Annual average calcium oxide content for 
calcined lime byproduct/waste type i sold (metric tons CaO/metric 
ton lime).
CaOLKD,i,n = Calcium oxide content for calcined lime 
byproduct/waste type i sold, for calendar month n, determined 
according to Sec.  98.194(c) for Equation S-2 of this section 
(metric tons CaO/metric ton lime).
n = Number of calendar months with calculated CaOLKD,i,n 
value used to calculate annual average calcium oxide content.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE16.013

Where:

MgOLKD,i,avg = Annual average magnesium oxide content for 
calcined lime byproduct/waste type i sold (metric tons MgO/metric 
ton lime).
MgOLKD,i,n = Magnesium oxide content for calcined lime 
byproduct/waste type i sold, for calendar month n, determined 
according to Sec.  98.194(c) for Equation S-2 of this section 
(metric tons MgO/metric ton lime).
n = Number of calendar months with calculated MgOLKD,i,n 
value used to calculate annual average magnesium oxide content.

0
42. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.196 by revising paragraph 
(b) introductory text and adding paragraphs (b)(19) through (21) to 
read as follows:

Sec.  98.196  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) If a CEMS is not used to measure CO2 emissions, then 
you must report the information listed in paragraphs (b)(1) through 
(21) of this section.
* * * * *
    (19) Annual average emission factors for each lime product type 
produced.
    (20) Annual average emission factors for each calcined byproduct/
waste by lime type that is sold.
    (21) Annual average results of chemical composition analysis of 
each type of lime product produced and calcined byproduct/waste sold.

Subpart U--Miscellaneous Uses of Carbonate

0
43. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.216 by revising paragraph 
(e) introductory text to read as follows:

Sec.  98.216  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (e) If you followed the calculation method of Sec.  98.213(a), you 
must report the information in paragraphs (e)(1) through (3) of this 
section.
* * * * *

Subpart V--Nitric Acid Production

0
44. Effective January 1, 2018, revise Sec.  98.220 to read as follows:

Sec.  98.220   Definition of source category.

    This source category includes a nitric acid production facility 
using one or more trains to produce weak nitric acid (30 to 70 percent 
in strength). Starting with reporting year 2018, this source category 
includes all nitric acid production facilities using one or more trains 
to produce nitric acid (any

[[Page 89260]]

strength). A nitric acid train produces nitric acid through the 
catalytic oxidation of ammonia.

0
45. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.223 by revising paragraph 
(a)(2) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.223  Calculating GHG emissions.

    (a) * * *
    (2) Request Administrator approval for an alternative method of 
determining N2O emissions according to paragraphs (a)(2)(i) 
through (iv) of this section.
    (i) If you received Administrator approval for an alternative 
method of determining N2O emissions in the previous 
reporting year and your methodology is unchanged, your alternative 
method is automatically approved for the next reporting year.
    (ii) You must notify the EPA of your use of a previously approved 
alternative method in your annual report.
    (iii) Otherwise, if you have not received Administrator approval 
for an alternative method of determining N2O emissions in a 
prior reporting year or your methodology has changed, you must submit 
the request within the first 30 days of each subsequent reporting year.
    (iv) If the Administrator does not approve your requested 
alternative method within 150 days of the end of the reporting year, 
you must determine the N2O emissions for the current 
reporting period using the procedures specified in paragraph (a)(1) of 
this section.
* * * * *

0
46. Effective January 1, 2019, amend Sec.  98.226 by revising paragraph 
(h) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.226   Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (h) Abatement technologies used (if applicable) and date of 
installation of abatement technology.
* * * * *

Subpart X--Petrochemical Production

0
47. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.240 by revising paragraph 
(a) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.240  Definition of the source category.

    (a) The petrochemical production source category consists of 
processes as described in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section.
    (1) The petrochemical production source category consists of all 
processes that produce acrylonitrile, carbon black, ethylene, ethylene 
dichloride, ethylene oxide, or methanol, as either an intermediate in 
the on-site production of other chemicals or as an end product for sale 
or shipment off site, except as specified in paragraphs (b) through (g) 
of this section.
    (2) When ethylene dichloride and vinyl chloride monomer are 
produced in an integrated process, you may consider the entire 
integrated process to be the petrochemical process for the purpose of 
complying with the mass balance option in Sec.  98.243(c). If you elect 
to consider the integrated process to be the petrochemical process, 
then the mass balance must be performed over the entire integrated 
process.
* * * * *

0
48. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.243 by revising 
paragraphs (c)(3), (c)(4) introductory text, and (c)(4)(i) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.243  Calculating GHG emissions.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (3) Collect a sample of each feedstock and product at least once 
per month and determine the molecular weight (for gaseous materials 
when the quantity is measured in scf) and carbon content of each sample 
according to the procedures of Sec.  98.244(b)(4). If multiple valid 
molecular weight or carbon content measurements are made during the 
monthly measurement period, average them arithmetically. However, if a 
particular liquid or solid feedstock is delivered in lots, and if 
multiple deliveries of the same feedstock are received from the same 
supply source in a given calendar month, only one representative sample 
is required. Alternatively, you may use the results of analyses 
conducted by a feedstock supplier, or product customer, provided the 
sampling and analysis is conducted at least once per month using any of 
the procedures specified in Sec.  98.244(b)(4).
    (4) If you determine that the monthly average concentration of a 
specific compound in a feedstock or product is greater than 99.5 
percent by volume or mass, then as an alternative to the sampling and 
analysis specified in paragraph (c)(3) of this section, you may 
determine molecular weight and carbon content in accordance with 
paragraphs (c)(4)(i) through (iii) of this section.
    (i) Calculate the molecular weight and carbon content assuming 100 
percent of that feedstock or product is the specific compound.
* * * * *

0
49. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.246 by revising 
paragraphs (a)(5) and (a)(6)(ii) and (iii), adding paragraphs (a)(14) 
and (15), and revising paragraphs (b)(2), (3), and (8) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.246   Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (5) Annual quantity of each type of petrochemical produced from 
each process unit (metric tons). If you are electing to consider the 
petrochemical process unit to be the entire integrated ethylene 
dichloride/vinyl chloride monomer process, report the amount of 
intermediate EDC produced (metric tons). The reported amount of 
intermediate EDC produced may be a measured quantity or an estimate 
that is based on process knowledge and best available data.
    (6) * * *
    (ii) Description of each type of measurement device (e.g., flow 
meter, weighing device) used to determine volume or mass in accordance 
with Sec.  98.244(b)(1) through (3).
    (iii) Identification of each method (i.e., method number, title, or 
other description) used to determine volume or mass in accordance with 
Sec.  98.244(b)(1) through (3).
* * * * *
    (14) Annual average of the measurements or determinations of the 
carbon content of each feedstock and product, conducted according to 
Sec.  98.243(c)(3) or (4).
    (i) For feedstocks and products that are gaseous or solid, report 
this quantity in kg C per kg of feedstock or product.
    (ii) For liquid feedstocks and products, report this quantity 
either in units of kg C per kg of feedstock or product, or kg C per 
gallon of feedstock or product.
    (15) For each gaseous feedstock and product, the annual average of 
the measurements or determinations of the molecular weight in units of 
kg per kg mole, conducted according to Sec.  98.243(c)(3) or (4).
    (b) * * *
    (2) For CEMS used on stacks that include emissions from stationary 
combustion units that burn any amount of off-gas from the petrochemical 
process, report the relevant information required under Sec.  
98.36(c)(2) and (e)(2)(vi) for the Tier 4 calculation methodology. 
Section 98.36(c)(2)(ii), (ix) and (x) do not apply for the purposes of 
this subpart.
    (3) For CEMS used on stacks that do not include emissions from 
stationary combustion units, report the information required under 
Sec.  98.36(b)(6) and (7), (b)(9)(i) and (ii) and (e)(2)(vi).
* * * * *
    (8) Annual quantity of each type of petrochemical produced from 
each process unit (metric tons). If you are electing to consider the 
petrochemical

[[Page 89261]]

process unit to be the entire integrated ethylene dichloride/vinyl 
chloride monomer process, report the amount of intermediate EDC 
produced (metric tons). The reported amount of intermediate EDC 
produced may be a measured quantity or an estimate that is based on 
process knowledge and best available data.
* * * * *

0
50. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.247 by revising paragraph 
(a) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.247   Records that must be retained.

* * * * *
    (a) If you comply with the CEMS measurement methodology in Sec.  
98.243(b), then you must retain under this subpart the records required 
for the Tier 4 Calculation Methodology in Sec.  98.37, records of the 
procedures used to develop estimates of the fraction of total emissions 
attributable to petrochemical processing and combustion of 
petrochemical process off-gas as required in Sec.  98.246(b), and 
records of any annual average HHV calculations.
* * * * *

0
51. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.248 by revising the 
definition for ``Product'' to read as follows:

Sec.  98.248   Definitions.

* * * * *
    Product means each of the following carbon-containing outputs from 
a process: The petrochemical, recovered byproducts, and liquid organic 
wastes that are not combusted onsite. Product does not include process 
vent emissions, fugitive emissions, or wastewater.

Subpart Y--Petroleum Refineries

0
52. Effective January 1, 2019, amend Sec.  98.253 by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (b) introductory text, (b)(1)(iii)(B), (h)(1) 
introductory text, and (h)(2) introductory text;
0
b. Revising parameters ``0.98'' of Equations Y-16a and Y-16b and 
``0.02'' of Equation Y-17 in paragraph (h)(2); and
0
c. Revising paragraphs (i) and (j) introductory text.
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.253  Calculating GHG emissions.

* * * * *
    (b) For flares, calculate GHG emissions according to the 
requirements in paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this section. All gas 
discharged through the flare stack must be included in the flare GHG 
emissions calculations with the exception of gas used for the flare 
pilots, which may be excluded.
    (1) * * *
    (iii) * * *
    (B) For periods of normal operation, use the average higher heating 
value measured for the fuel gas used as flare sweep or purge gas for 
the higher heating value of the flare gas. If higher heating value of 
the fuel gas is not measured, the higher heating value of the flare gas 
under normal operations may be estimated from historic data or 
engineering calculations.
* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (1) For uncontrolled asphalt blowing operations or asphalt blowing 
operations controlled either by vapor scrubbing or by another non-
combustion control device, calculate CO2 and CH4 
emissions using Equations Y-14 and Y-15 of this section, respectively.
* * * * *
    (2) For asphalt blowing operations controlled by either a thermal 
oxidizer, a flare, or other vapor combustion control device, calculate 
CO2 using either Equation Y-16a or Y-16b of this section and 
calculate CH4 emissions using Equation Y-17 of this section, 
provided these emissions are not already included in the flare 
emissions calculated in paragraph (b) of this section or in the 
stationary combustion unit emissions required under subpart C of this 
part (General Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources).

* * * (Eq. Y-16a)
* * * * *
0.98 = Assumed combustion efficiency of the control device.
* * * * *

* * * (Eq. Y-16b)
* * * * *
0.98 = Assumed combustion efficiency of the control device.
* * * * *

* * * (Eq. Y-17)
* * * * *
0.02 = Fraction of methane uncombusted in the controlled stream 
based on assumed 98% combustion efficiency.
* * * * *
    (i) For each delayed coking unit, calculate the CH4 
emissions from delayed decoking operations (venting, draining, 
deheading, and coke-cutting) according to the requirements in 
paragraphs (i)(1) through (5) of this section.
    (1) Determine the typical dry mass of coke produced per cycle from 
company records of the mass of coke produced by the delayed coking 
unit. Alternatively, you may estimate the typical dry mass of coke 
produced per cycle based on the delayed coking unit vessel (coke drum) 
dimensions and typical coke drum outage at the end of the coking cycle 
using Equation Y-18a of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE16.014

Where:

Mcoke = Typical dry mass of coke in the delayed coking 
unit vessel at the end of the coking cycle (metric tons/cycle).
[rho]bulk = Bulk coke bed density (metric tons per cubic 
feet; mt/ft\3\). Use the default value of 0.0191 mt/ft\3\.
Hdrum = Internal height of delayed coking unit vessel 
(feet).
Houtage = Typical distance from the top of the delayed 
coking unit vessel to the top of the coke bed (i.e., coke drum 
outage) at the end of the coking cycle (feet) from company records 
or engineering estimates.
D = Diameter of delayed coking unit vessel (feet).

    (2) Determine the typical mass of water in the delayed coking unit 
vessel at the end of the cooling cycle prior to venting to the 
atmosphere using Equation Y-18b of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE16.015

[[Page 89262]]

Where:

Mwater = Mass of water in the delayed coking unit vessel 
at the end of the cooling cycle just prior to atmospheric venting 
(metric tons/cycle).
[rho]water = Density of water at average temperature of 
the delayed coking unit vessel at the end of the cooling cycle just 
prior to atmospheric venting (metric tons per cubic feet; mt/ft\3\). 
Use the default value of 0.0270 mt/ft\3\.
Hwater = Typical distance from the bottom of the coking 
unit vessel to the top of the water level at the end of the cooling 
cycle just prior to atmospheric venting (feet) from company records 
or engineering estimates.
Mcoke = Typical dry mass of coke in the delayed coking 
unit vessel at the end of the coking cycle (metric tons/cycle) as 
determined in paragraph (i)(1) of this section.
[rho]particle = Particle density of coke (metric tons per 
cubic feet; mt/ft\3\). Use the default value of 0.0382 mt/ft\3\.
D = Diameter of delayed coking unit vessel (feet).

    (3) Determine the average temperature of the delayed coking unit 
vessel when the drum is first vented to the atmosphere using either 
Equation Y-18c or Y-18d of this section, as appropriate, based on the 
measurement system available.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE16.020

Where:

Tinitial = Average temperature of the delayed coking unit 
vessel when the drum is first vented to the atmosphere ([deg]F).
Toverhead = Temperature of the delayed coking unit vessel 
overhead line measured as near the coking unit vessel as practical 
just prior to venting to the atmosphere. If the temperature of the 
delayed coking unit vessel overhead line is less than 216 [deg]F, 
use Toverhead = 216 [deg]F.
Tbottom = Temperature of the delayed coking unit vessel 
near the bottom of the coke bed. If the temperature at the bottom of 
the coke bed is less than 212 [deg]F, use Tbottom = 212 
[deg]F.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE16.021

Where:

Tinitial = Average temperature of the delayed coking unit 
vessel when the drum is first vented to the atmosphere ([deg]F).
Poverhead = Pressure of the delayed coking unit vessel 
just prior to opening the atmospheric vent (pounds per square inch 
gauge, psig).

    (4) Determine the typical mass of steam generated and released per 
decoking cycle using Equation Y-18e of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE16.016

Where:

Msteam = Mass of steam generated and released per 
decoking cycle (metric tons/cycle).
fConvLoss = fraction of total heat loss that is due to 
convective heat loss from the sides of the coke vessel (unitless). 
Use the default value of 0.10.
Mwater = Mass of water in the delayed coking unit vessel 
at the end of the cooling cycle just prior to atmospheric venting 
(metric tons/cycle).
Cp,water = Heat capacity of water (British thermal units 
per metric ton per degree Fahrenheit; Btu/mt-[deg]F). Use the 
default value of 2,205 Btu/mt-[deg]F.
Mcoke = Typical dry mass of coke in the delayed coking 
unit vessel at the end of the coking cycle (metric tons/cycle) as 
determined in paragraph (i)(1) of this section.
Cp,coke = Heat capacity of petroleum coke (Btu/mt-
[deg]F). Use the default value of 584 Btu/mt-[deg]F.
Tinitial = Average temperature of the delayed coking unit 
vessel when the drum is first vented to the atmosphere ([deg]F) as 
determined in paragraph (i)(3) of this section.
Tfinal = Temperature of the delayed coking unit vessel 
when steam generation stops ([deg]F). Use the default value of 
212[emsp14][deg]F.
[Delta]Hvap = Heat of vaporization of water (British 
thermal units per metric ton; Btu/mt). Use the default value of 
2,116,000 Btu/mt.

    (5) Calculate the CH4 emissions from decoking operations 
at each delayed coking unit using Equation Y-18f of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE16.017

Where:

CH4 = Annual methane emissions from the delayed coking 
unit decoking operations (metric ton/year).
Msteam = Mass of steam generated and released per 
decoking cycle (metric tons/cycle) as determined in paragraph (i)(3) 
of this section.
EmFDCU = Methane emission factor for delayed coking unit 
(kilograms CH4 per metric ton of steam; kg 
CH4/mt steam) from unit-specific measurement data. If you 
do not have unit-specific measurement data, use the default value of 
7.9 kg CH4/metric ton steam.
N = Cumulative number of decoking cycles (or coke-cutting cycles) 
for all delayed coking unit vessels associated with the delayed 
coking unit during the year.
0.001 = Conversion factor (metric ton/kg).

    (j) For each process vent not covered in paragraphs (a) through (i) 
of this section that can reasonably be expected to contain greater than 
2 percent by volume CO2 or greater than 0.5 percent by 
volume of CH4 or greater than 0.01 percent by volume (100 
parts per million) of N2O, calculate GHG emissions using 
Equation Y-19 of this section. You must also use Equation Y-19 of this 
section to calculate CH4 emissions for catalytic reforming 
unit depressurization and purge vents when methane is used as the purge 
gas, and

[[Page 89263]]

CO2 and/or CH4 emissions, as applicable, if you 
elected this method as an alternative to the methods in paragraph (f), 
(h), or (k) of this section.
* * * * *

0
53. Effective January 1, 2019, amend Sec.  98.254 by revising paragraph 
(j), redesignating paragraph (k) as paragraph (l), and adding new 
paragraph (k) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.254   Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

* * * * *
    (j) Determine the quantity of petroleum process streams using 
company records. These quantities include the quantity of coke produced 
per cycle, asphalt blown, quantity of crude oil plus the quantity of 
intermediate products received from off site, and the quantity of 
unstabilized crude oil received at the facility.
    (k) Determine temperature or pressure of delayed coking unit vessel 
using process instrumentation operated, maintained, and calibrated 
according to the manufacturer's instructions.
* * * * *

0
54. Effective January 1, 2019, amend Sec.  98.256 by revising 
paragraphs (e)(3) and (6), (h)(5)(ii)(A), and (k) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.256   Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (3) A description of the flare service (general facility flare, 
unit flare, emergency only or back-up flare) and an indication of 
whether or not the flare is serviced by a flare gas recovery system.
* * * * *
    (6) If you use Equation Y-1a in Sec.  98.253, an indication of 
whether daily or weekly measurement periods are used, annual average 
carbon content of the flare gas (in kg carbon per kg flare gas), and, 
either the annual volume of flare gas combusted (in scf/year) and the 
annual average molecular weight (in kg/kg-mole), or the annual mass of 
flare gas combusted (in kg/yr).
* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (5) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (A) The annual volume of recycled tail gas (in scf/year).
* * * * *
    (k) For each delayed coking unit, the owner or operator shall 
report:
    (1) The unit ID number (if applicable).
    (2) Maximum rated throughput of the unit, in bbl/stream day.
    (3) Annual quantity of coke produced in the unit during the 
reporting year, in metric tons.
    (4) The calculated annual CH4 emissions (in metric tons 
of CH4) for the delayed coking unit.
    (5) The total number of delayed coking vessels (or coke drums) 
associated with the delayed coking unit.
    (6) The basis for the typical dry mass of coke in the delayed 
coking unit vessel at the end of the coking cycle (mass measurements 
from company records or calculated using Equation Y-18a of this 
subpart).
    (7) An indication of the method used to estimate the average 
temperature of the coke bed, Tinitial (overhead temperature 
and Equation Y-18c of this subpart or pressure correlation and Equation 
Y-18d of this subpart).
    (8) An indication of whether a unit-specific methane emissions 
factor or the default methane emission factor was used for the delayed 
coking unit.
* * * * *

0
55. Effective January 1, 2019, amend Sec.  98.257 by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (b) introductory text and (b)(41) through (45);
0
b. Removing paragraph (b)(46);
0
c. Redesignating paragraphs (b)(47) through (67) as paragraphs (b)(53) 
through (73);
0
d. Adding new paragraph (b)(46) and paragraphs (b)(47) through (52); 
and
0
e. Revising newly redesignated paragraph (b)(65).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  98.257   Records that must be retained.

* * * * *
    (b) Verification software records. You must keep a record of the 
file generated by the verification software specified in Sec.  98.5(b) 
for the applicable data specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (73) of 
this section. Retention of this file satisfies the recordkeeping 
requirement for the data in paragraphs (b)(1) through (73) of this 
section.
* * * * *
    (41) Typical dry mass of coke in the delayed coking unit vessel at 
the end of the coking cycle (metric tons/cycle) from company records or 
calculated using Equation Y-18a of this subpart (Equations Y-18a, Y-18b 
and Y-18e in Sec.  98.253) for each delayed coking unit.
    (42) Internal height of delayed coking unit vessel (feet) (Equation 
Y-18a in Sec.  98.253) for each delayed coking unit.
    (43) Typical distance from the top of the delayed coking unit 
vessel to the top of the coke bed (i.e., coke drum outage) at the end 
of the coking cycle (feet) from company records or engineering 
estimates (Equation Y-18a in Sec.  98.253) for each delayed coking 
unit.
    (44) Diameter of delayed coking unit vessel (feet) (Equations Y-18a 
and Y-18b in Sec.  98.253) for each delayed coking unit.
    (45) Mass of water in the delayed coking unit vessel at the end of 
the cooling cycle prior to atmospheric venting (metric ton/cycle) 
(Equations Y-18b and Y-18e in Sec.  98.253) for each delayed coking 
unit.
    (46) Typical distance from the bottom of the coking unit vessel to 
the top of the water level at the end of the cooling cycle just prior 
to atmospheric venting (feet) from company records or engineering 
estimates (Equation Y-18b in Sec.  98.253) for each delayed coking 
unit.
    (47) Mass of steam generated and released per decoking cycle 
(metric tons/cycle) (Equations Y-18e and Y-18f in Sec.  98.253) for 
each delayed coking unit.
    (48) Average temperature of the delayed coking unit vessel when the 
drum is first vented to the atmosphere ([deg]F) (Equations Y-18c, Y-
18d, and Y-18e in Sec.  98.253) for each delayed coking unit.
    (49) Temperature of the delayed coking unit vessel overhead line 
measured as near the coking unit vessel as practical just prior to 
venting the atmosphere (Equation Y-18c in Sec.  98.253) for each 
delayed coking unit.
    (50) Pressure of the delayed coking unit vessel just prior to 
opening the atmospheric vent (psig) (Equation Y-18d in Sec.  98.253) 
for each delayed coking unit.
    (51) Methane emission factor for delayed coking unit (kilograms 
CH4 per metric ton of steam; kg CH4/mt steam) 
(Equation Y-18f in Sec.  98.253) for each delayed coking unit.
    (52) Cumulative number of decoking cycles (or coke-cutting cycles) 
for all delayed coking unit vessels associated with the delayed coking 
unit during the year (Equation Y-18f in Sec.  98.253) for each delayed 
coking unit.
* * * * *
    (65) Specify whether the calculated or default loading factor L 
specified in Sec.  98.253(n) is entered, for each liquid loaded to each 
vessel (methods specified in Sec.  98.253(n)).
* * * * *

Subpart Z--Phosphoric Acid Production

0
56. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.266 by revising paragraph 
(f)(3) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.266   Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (f) * * *

[[Page 89264]]

    (3) Annual phosphoric acid production capacity (tons) for each wet-
process phosphoric acid process line.
* * * * *

Subpart AA--Pulp and Paper Manufacturing

0
57. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.273 by revising 
paragraphs (a)(1), (b)(1), and (c)(1) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.273  Calculating GHG emissions.

    (a) * * *
    (1) Calculate fossil fuel-based CO2 emissions from 
direct measurement of fossil fuels consumed and default emissions 
factors according to the Tier 1 methodology for stationary combustion 
sources in Sec.  98.33(a)(1). Tiers 2 or 3 from Sec.  98.33(a)(2) or 
(3) may be used to calculate fossil fuel-based CO2 emissions 
if the respective monitoring and QA/QC requirements described in Sec.  
98.34 are met.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) Calculate fossil CO2 emissions from fossil fuels 
from direct measurement of fossil fuels consumed and default emissions 
factors according to the Tier 1 Calculation Methodology for stationary 
combustion sources in Sec.  98.33(a)(1). Tiers 2 or 3 from Sec.  
98.33(a)(2) or (3) may be used to calculate fossil fuel-based 
CO2 emissions if the respective monitoring and QA/QC 
requirements described in Sec.  98.34 are met.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) Calculate CO2 emissions from fossil fuel from direct 
measurement of fossil fuels consumed and default HHV and default 
emissions factors, according to the Tier 1 Calculation Methodology for 
stationary combustion sources in Sec.  98.33(a)(1). Tiers 2 or 3 from 
Sec.  98.33(a)(2) or (3) may be used to calculate fossil fuel-based 
CO2 emissions if the respective monitoring and QA/QC 
requirements described in Sec.  98.34 are met.
* * * * *

0
58. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.275 by revising paragraph 
(b) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.275  Procedures for estimating missing data.

* * * * *
    (b) For missing measurements of the mass of spent liquor solids or 
spent pulping liquor flow rates, use the lesser value of either the 
maximum mass or fuel flow rate for the combustion unit, or the maximum 
mass or flow rate that the fuel meter can measure. Alternatively, 
records of the daily spent liquor solids firing rate obtained to comply 
with Sec.  63.866(c)(1) of this chapter may be used, adjusting for the 
duration of the missing measurements, as appropriate.
* * * * *

0
59. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Table AA-2 to subpart AA of part 
98 by:
0
a. Revising the column headings for ``Kraft lime kilns'' and ``Kraft 
calciners'';
0
b. Revising the entry for ``Petroleum coke'';
0
c. Revising footnote a; and
0
d. Adding footnote b.
    The revisions read as follows:

       Table AA-2 to Subpart AA of Part 98--Kraft Lime Kiln and Calciner Emissions Factors for CH4 and N2O
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Fossil fuel-based emissions factors (kg/mmBtu HHV)
                                             -------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Fuel                           Kraft rotary lime kilns              Kraft calciners a
                                             -------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    CH4              N2O              CH4              N2O
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Petroleum coke..............................          0.0027                0           \b\ NA           \b\ NA
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes, for example, fluidized bed calciners at kraft mills.
\b\ Emission factors for kraft calciners are not available.

Subpart CC--Soda Ash Manufacturing

0
60. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.294 by revising paragraph 
(a)(2) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.294  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (2) Measure the mass of trona input to each soda ash manufacturing 
line on a monthly basis using belt scales or methods used for 
accounting purposes.
* * * * *

Subpart DD--Electrical Transmission and Distribution Equipment Use

0
61. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.306 by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a)(2) and (3);
0
b. Adding paragraphs (a)(4) and (5);
0
c. Revising paragraphs (b) and (c); and
0
d. Adding paragraphs (m) and (n).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  98.306  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (2) New hermetically sealed-pressure switchgear during the year.
    (3) New equipment other than hermetically sealed-pressure 
switchgear during the year.
    (4) Retired hermetically sealed-pressure switchgear during the 
year.
    (5) Retired equipment other than hermetically sealed-pressure 
switchgear during the year.
    (b) Transmission miles (length of lines carrying voltages above 35 
kilovolts).
    (c) Distribution miles (length of lines carrying voltages at or 
below 35 kilovolts).
* * * * *
    (m) State(s) or territory in which the facility lies.
    (n) The number of SF6- or PFC-containing pieces of 
equipment in each of the following equipment categories:
    (1) New hermetically sealed-pressure switchgear during the year.
    (2) New equipment other than hermetically sealed-pressure 
switchgear during the year.
    (3) Retired hermetically sealed-pressure switchgear during the 
year.
    (4) Retired equipment other than hermetically sealed-pressure 
switchgear during the year.

Subpart FF--Underground Coal Mines

0
62. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.323 by:
0
a. Revising parameter ``n'' of Equation FF-1 in paragraph (a);
0
b. Revising paragraphs (a)(1) introductory text and (a)(2);

[[Page 89265]]

0
c. Revising parameters ``CH4D'' and ``n'' of Equation FF-3 
in paragraph (b); and
0
d. Revising paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) introductory text.
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.323  Calculating GHG emissions.

    (a) * * *
* * * * *
n = The number of days in the quarter where active ventilation of 
mining operations is taking place at the monitoring point. To obtain 
the number of days in the quarter, divide the total number of hours 
in the quarter where active ventilation is taking place by 24 hours 
per day.
* * * * *
    (1) The quarterly periods are:
* * * * *
    (2) Values of V, C, T, P, and, if applicable, (fH2O), 
must be based on measurements taken at least once each quarter with no 
fewer than 6 weeks between measurements. If measurements are taken more 
frequently than once per quarter, then use the average value for all 
measurements taken. If continuous measurements are taken, then use the 
average value over the time period of continuous monitoring.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
* * * * *
CH4D = Weekly CH4 liberated from the 
monitoring point (metric tons CH4).
* * * * *
n = The number of days in the week that the system is operational at 
that measurement point. To obtain the number of days in the week, 
divide the total number of hours that the system is operational by 
24 hours per day.
* * * * *
    (1) Values for V, C, T, P, and, if applicable, (fH2O), 
must be based on measurements taken at least once each calendar week 
with at least 3 days between measurements. If measurements are taken 
more frequently than once per week, then use the average value for all 
measurements taken that week. If continuous measurements are taken, 
then use the average values over the time period of continuous 
monitoring when the continuous monitoring equipment is properly 
functioning.
    (2) Quarterly total CH4 liberated from degasification 
systems for the mine must be determined as the sum of CH4 
liberated determined at each of the monitoring points in the mine, 
summed over the number of weeks in the quarter, as follows:
* * * * *

0
63. Amend Sec.  98.324 by revising paragraph (b)(1) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.324   Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) Collect quarterly or more frequent grab samples (with no fewer 
than 6 weeks between measurements) for methane concentration and make 
quarterly measurements of flow rate, temperature, pressure, and, if 
applicable, moisture content. The sampling and measurements must be 
made at the same locations as Mine Safety and Health Administration 
(MSHA) inspection samples are taken, and should be taken when the mine 
is operating under normal conditions. You must follow MSHA sampling 
procedures as set forth in the MSHA Handbook entitled, Coal Mine Safety 
and Health General Inspection Procedures Handbook, Handbook Number: 
PH16-V-1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  98.7). You must record 
the date of sampling, flow, temperature, pressure, and moisture 
measurements, the methane concentration (percent), the bottle number of 
samples collected, and the location of the measurement or collection.
* * * * *

0
64. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.324 by revising paragraph 
(h) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.324  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

* * * * *
    (h) The owner or operator shall document the procedures used to 
ensure the accuracy of gas flow rate, gas composition, temperature, 
pressure, and moisture content measurements. These procedures include, 
but are not limited to, calibration of flow meters, and other 
measurement devices. The estimated accuracy of measurements and the 
technical basis for the estimated accuracy shall be recorded.

0
65. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.326 by revising 
paragraphs (a), (f) through (i), (o), and (r)(2) and (3) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.326  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (a) Quarterly CH4 liberated from each ventilation 
monitoring point, (metric tons CH4). Where MSHA reports are 
the monitoring method chosen under Sec.  98.324(b), each annual report 
must include the MSHA reports used to report quarterly CH4 
concentration and volumetric flow rate as attachments.
* * * * *
    (f) Quarterly volumetric flow rate for each ventilation monitoring 
point and units of measure (scfm or acfm), date and location of each 
measurement, and method of measurement (quarterly sampling or 
continuous monitoring), used in Equation FF-1 of this subpart. Specify 
whether the volumetric flow rate measurement at each ventilation 
monitoring point is on dry basis or wet basis; and, if a flow meter is 
used, indicate whether or not the flow meter automatically corrects for 
moisture content.
    (g) Quarterly CH4 concentration for each ventilation 
monitoring point, dates and locations of each measurement, and method 
of measurement (sampling or continuous monitoring). Specify whether the 
CH4 concentration measurement at each ventilation monitoring 
point is on dry basis or wet basis.
    (h) Weekly volumetric flow rate used to calculate CH4 
liberated from degasification systems and units of measure (acfm or 
scfm), and method of measurement (sampling or continuous monitoring), 
used in Equation FF-3 of this subpart. Specify whether the volumetric 
flow rate measurement at each degasification monitoring point is on dry 
basis or wet basis; and, if a flow meter is used, indicate whether or 
not the flow meter automatically corrects for moisture content.
    (i) Quarterly CH4 concentration (%) used to calculate 
CH4 liberated from degasification systems, and if the data 
is based on CEMS or weekly sampling. Specify whether the CH4 
concentration measurement at each degasification monitoring point is on 
dry basis or wet basis.
* * * * *
    (o) Temperature ([deg]R), pressure (atm), moisture content (if 
applicable), and the moisture correction factor (if applicable) used in 
Equations FF-1 and FF-3 of this subpart; and the gaseous organic 
concentration correction factor, if Equation FF-9 of this subpart was 
required. Moisture content is required to be reported only if 
CH4 concentration is measured on a wet basis and volumetric 
flow is measured on a dry basis, if CH4 concentration is 
measured on a dry basis and volumetric flow is measured on a wet basis; 
and, if a flow meter is used, the flow meter does not automatically 
correct for moisture content.
* * * * *
    (r) * * *
    (2) Start date and close date of each well, shaft, and vent hole. 
If the well, shaft, or vent hole is operating through the end of the 
reporting year, December 31st of the reporting year shall be the close 
date for purposes of reporting.
    (3) Number of days the well, shaft, or vent hole was in operation 
during the

[[Page 89266]]

reporting year. To obtain the number of days in the reporting year, 
divide the total number of hours that the system was in operation by 24 
hours per day.
* * * * *

Subpart HH--Municipal Solid Waste Landfills

0
66. Amend Sec.  98.346 by revising paragraphs (f) and (i)(5) and (7) 
and adding paragraph (i)(13) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.346  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (f) The surface area of the landfill containing waste (in square 
meters), identification of the type(s) of cover material used (as 
either organic cover, clay cover, sand cover, or other soil mixtures).
* * * * *
    (i) * * *
    (5) An indication of whether destruction occurs at the landfill 
facility, off-site, or both. If destruction occurs at the landfill 
facility, also report for each measurement location:
    (i) The number of destruction devices associated with the 
measurement location.
    (ii) The annual operating hours of the gas collection system 
associated with the measurement location.
    (iii) For each destruction device associated with the measurement 
location, report:
    (A) The destruction efficiency (decimal).
    (B) The annual operating hours where active gas flow was sent to 
the destruction device.
* * * * *
    (7) A description of the gas collection system (manufacturer, 
capacity, and number of wells), the surface area (square meters) and 
estimated waste depth (meters) for each area specified in Table HH-3 to 
this subpart, the estimated gas collection system efficiency for 
landfills with this gas collection system and an indication of whether 
passive vents and/or passive flares (vents or flares that are not 
considered part of the gas collection system as defined in Sec.  98.6) 
are present at the landfill.
* * * * *
    (13) Methane emissions for the landfill (i.e., the subpart HH total 
methane emissions). Choose the methane emissions from either Equation 
HH-6 or Equation HH-8 of this subpart that best represents the 
emissions from the landfill. If the quantity of recovered 
CH4 from Equation HH-4 of this subpart is used as the value 
of GCH4 in Equation HH-6, use the methane emissions 
calculated using Equation HH-8 as the methane emissions for the 
landfill.

0
67. Amend Sec.  98.348 by adding definitions for ``Final cover,'' 
``Intermediate or interim cover,'' and ``Passive vent'' in alphabetical 
order to read as follows:

Sec.  98.348  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Final cover means materials used at a landfill to meet final 
closure regulations of the competent federal, state, or local 
authority.
* * * * *
    Intermediate or interim cover means the placement of material over 
waste in a landfill for a period of time prior to the disposal of 
additional waste and/or final closure as defined by state regulation, 
permit, guidance or written plan, or state accepted best management 
practice.
* * * * *
    Passive vent means a pipe or a system of pipes that allows landfill 
gas to flow naturally, without the use of a fan or similar mechanical 
draft equipment, to the surface of the landfill where an opening or 
pipe (vent) allows for the free flow of landfill gas to the atmosphere 
or to a passive vent flare without diffusion through the top layer of 
surface soil.
* * * * *

0
68. Amend Table HH-3 to subpart HH of part 98 by:
0
a. Revising the entry for ``A5''; and
0
b. Adding heading ``Weighted average collection efficiency for 
landfills:'' after the entry for ``A5.''
    The revision and addition read as follows:

                    Table HH-4 to Subpart HH of Part 98--Landfill Methane Oxidation Fractions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Under these conditions:               Use this landfill methane oxidation fraction:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
C2: For landfills that have a geomembrane  0.0
 (synthetic) cover or other non-soil
 barrier meeting the definition of final
 cover with less than 12 inches of cover
 soil for greater than 50% of the
 landfill area containing waste.
C3: For landfills that do not meet the     0.10
 conditions in C2 above and for which you
 elect not to determine methane flux.
C4: For landfills that do not meet the     0.10
 conditions in C2 or C3 above and that do
 not have final cover, or intermediate or
 interim cover \a\ for greater than 50%
 of the landfill area containing waste.

[[Page 89267]]

 
C5: For landfills that do not meet the     0.35
 conditions in C2 or C3 above and that
 have final cover, or intermediate or
 interim cover \a\ for greater than 50%
 of the landfill area containing waste
 and for which the methane flux rate \b\
 is less than 10 grams per square meter
 per day (g/m\2\/d).
C6: For landfills that do not meet the     0.25
 conditions in C2 or C3 above and that
 have final cover or intermediate or
 interim cover \a\ for greater than 50%
 of the landfill area containing waste
 and for which the methane flux rate \b\
 is 10 to 70 g/m\2\/d.
C7: For landfills that do not meet the     0.10
 conditions in C2 or C3 above and that
 have final cover or intermediate or
 interim cover \a\ for greater than 50%
 of the landfill area containing waste
 and for which the methane flux rate \b\
 is greater than 70 g/m\2\/d.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Where a landfill is located in a state that does not have an intermediate or interim cover requirement, the
  landfill must have soil cover of 12 inches or greater in order to use an oxidation fraction of 0.25 or 0.35.

* * * * *

Subpart II--Industrial Wastewater Treatment

0
70. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.356 by revising paragraph 
(a) introductory text and adding paragraph (b)(6) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.356  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (a) Identify the anaerobic processes used in the industrial 
wastewater treatment system to treat industrial wastewater and 
industrial wastewater treatment sludge, provide a unique identifier for 
each anaerobic process, indicate the average depth in meters of each 
anaerobic lagoon, and indicate whether biogas generated by each 
anaerobic process is recovered. Provide a description or diagram of the 
industrial wastewater treatment system, identifying the processes used, 
indicating how the processes are related to each other, and providing a 
unique identifier for each anaerobic process. Each anaerobic process 
must be identified as one of the following:
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (6) If the facility performs an ethanol production processing 
operation as defined in Sec.  98.358, you must indicate if the facility 
uses a wet milling process or a dry milling process.
* * * * *

0
71. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.358 by adding definitions 
for ``Dry milling,'' ``Wet milling,'' and ``Weekly average'' in 
alphabetical order to read as follows:

Sec.  98.358  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Dry milling means the process in which shelled corn is milled by 
dry process, without an initial steeping step.
* * * * *
    Wet milling means the process in which shelled corn is steeped in a 
dilute solution of sulfurous acid (sulfur dioxide dissolved in water) 
prior to further processing.
    Weekly average means the sum of all values measured in a calendar 
week divided by the number of measurements.

Subpart LL--Suppliers of Coal-based Liquid Fuels

0
72. Effective January 1, 2018, revise Sec.  98.382 to read as follows:

Sec.  98.382  GHGs to report.

    Suppliers of coal-based liquid fuels must report the CO2 
emissions that would result from the complete combustion or oxidation 
of fossil-fuel products (besides coal or crude oil) produced, used as 
feedstock, imported, or exported during the calendar year. 
Additionally, producers must report CO2 emissions that would 
result from the complete combustion or oxidation of any biomass co-
processed with fossil fuel-based feedstocks.

0
73. Effective January 1, 2018, revise Sec.  98.383 to read as follows:

Sec.  98.383  Calculating GHG emissions.

    Suppliers of coal-based liquid fuels must follow the calculation 
methods of Sec.  98.393 as if they applied to the appropriate coal-to-
liquid product supplier (i.e., calculation methods for refiners apply 
to producers of coal-to-liquid products and calculation methods for 
importers and exporters of petroleum products apply to importers and 
exporters of coal-to-liquid products).
    (a) In calculation methods in Sec.  98.393 for petroleum products 
or petroleum-based products, suppliers of coal-to-liquid products shall 
also include coal-to-liquid products.
    (b) In calculation methods in Sec.  98.393 for non-crude feedstocks 
or non-crude petroleum feedstocks, producers of coal-to-liquid products 
shall also include coal-to-liquid products that enter the facility to 
be further processed or otherwise used on site.
    (c) In calculation methods in Sec.  98.393 for petroleum 
feedstocks, suppliers of coal-to-liquid products shall also include 
coal and coal-to-liquid products that enter the facility to be further 
processed or otherwise used on site.

0
74. Effective January 1, 2018, revise Sec.  98.384 to read as follows:

Sec.  98.384  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

    Suppliers of coal-based liquid fuels must follow the monitoring and 
QA/QC requirements in Sec.  98.394 as if they applied to the 
appropriate coal-to-liquid product supplier. Any monitoring and QA/QC 
requirement for petroleum products in Sec.  98.394 also applies to 
coal-to-liquid products.

0
75. Effective January 1, 2018, revise Sec.  98.385 to read as follows:

Sec.  98.385  Procedures for estimating missing data.

    Suppliers of coal-based liquid fuels must follow the procedures for 
estimating missing data in Sec.  98.395 as if they applied to the 
appropriate coal-to-liquid product supplier. Any procedure for 
estimating missing data for petroleum products in Sec.  98.395 also 
applies to coal-to-liquid products.

0
76. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.386 by:
0
a. Removing and reserving paragraphs (a)(4) and (8);
0
b. Revising the introductory text to paragraphs (a)(9) through (11);
0
c. Removing and reserving paragraph (a)(15);
0
d. Revising paragraph (a)(20);
0
e. Removing and reserving paragraph (b)(4);
0
f. Revising the introductory text to paragraphs (b)(5) and (6);
0
g. Removing and reserving paragraph (c)(4); and
0
h. Revising the introductory text to paragraphs (c)(5) and (6).
    The revisions read as follows:

[[Page 89268]]

Sec.  98.386  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (9) For every feedstock reported in paragraph (a)(2) of this 
section for which Calculation Method 2 in Sec.  98.393(f)(2) was used 
to determine an emissions factor, report:
* * * * *
    (10) For every non-solid feedstock reported in paragraph (a)(2) of 
this section for which Calculation Method 2 in Sec.  98.393(f)(2) was 
used to determine an emissions factor, report:
* * * * *
    (11) For every product reported in paragraph (a)(6) of this section 
for which Calculation Method 2 in Sec.  98.393(f)(2) was used to 
determine an emissions factor, report:
* * * * *
    (20) Annual quantity of bulk NGLs in metric tons or barrels 
received for processing during the reporting year. Report only 
quantities of bulk NGLs not reported in paragraph (a)(2) of this 
section.
    (b) * * *
    (5) For each product reported in paragraph (b)(2) of this section 
for which Calculation Method 2 in Sec.  98.393(f)(2) used was used to 
determine an emissions factor, report:
* * * * *
    (6) For each non-solid product reported in paragraph (b)(2) of this 
section for which Calculation Method 2 in Sec.  98.393(f)(2) was used 
to determine an emissions factor, report:
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (5) For each product reported in paragraph (c)(2) of this section 
for which Calculation Method 2 in Sec.  98.393(f)(2) was used to 
determine an emissions factor, report:
* * * * *
    (6) For each non-solid product reported in paragraph (c)(2) of this 
section for which Calculation Method 2 in Sec.  98.393(f)(2) used was 
used to determine an emissions factor, report:
* * * * *

0
77. Effective January 1, 2018, revise Sec.  98.387 to read as follows:

Sec.  98.387  Records that must be retained.

    Suppliers of coal-based liquid fuels must retain records according 
to the requirements in Sec.  98.397 as if they applied to the 
appropriate coal-to-liquid product supplier (e.g., retaining copies of 
all reports submitted to EPA under Sec.  98.386 and records to support 
information contained in those reports). Any records for petroleum 
products that are required to be retained in Sec.  98.397 are also 
required for coal-to-liquid products.

Subpart MM--Suppliers of Petroleum Products

Sec.  98.395  [Amended]

0
78. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.395 by removing paragraph 
(c).

Subpart NN--Suppliers of Natural Gas and Natural Gas Liquids

0
79. Effective January 1, 2018, revise Sec.  98.401 to read as follows:

Sec.  98.401  Reporting threshold.

    Any supplier of natural gas and natural gas liquids that meets the 
requirements of Sec.  98.2(a)(4) must report GHG emissions associated 
with the products they supply.

0
80. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.403 by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a)(1) introductory text;
0
b. Removing parameter ``CO2.'' of Equation NN-1 in paragraph 
(a)(1) and adding in its place a parameter for ``CO2i'';
0
c. Revising paragraph (a)(2) introductory text;
0
d. Removing parameter ``CO2.'' of Equation NN-2 in paragraph 
(a)(2) and adding in its place a parameter for ``CO2i'';
0
e. In paragraph (b)(1):
0
i. Removing parameter ``CO2.'' of Equation NN-3 and adding 
in its place a parameter for ``CO2j''; and
0
ii. Revising parameter ``Fuel'' of Equation NN-3;
0
f. Removing parameter ``CO2.'' of Equation NN-4 in paragraph 
(b)(2)(ii) and adding in its place a parameter for ``CO2k'';
0
g. In paragraph (b)(3)(i):
0
i. Removing parameter ``CO2.'' of Equation NN-5a and adding 
in its place a parameter for ``CO2l``; and
0
ii. Revising parameter ``EF'' of Equation NN-5a;
0
h. Removing parameter ``CO2.'' of Equation NN-5b in 
paragraph (b)(3)(ii) and adding in its place a parameter for 
``CO2n``;
0
i. Revising the parameters of Equation NN-6 in paragraph (b)(4);
0
j. In paragraph (c)(1)(ii):
0
i. Removing parameter ``CO2.'' of Equation NN-7 and adding 
in its place a parameter for ``CO2m``; and
0
ii. Revising parameter ``Fuelg'' of Equation NN-7; and
0
k. Revising the parameters of Equation NN-8 in paragraph (c)(2).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.403  Calculating GHG emissions.

    (a) * * *
    (1) Calculation Methodology 1. NGL fractionators shall estimate 
CO2 emissions that would result from the complete combustion 
or oxidation of the product(s) supplied using Equation NN-1 of this 
section. The annual volume of each NGL product supplied 
(Fuelh) shall include any amount of that NGL supplied in a 
mixture or blend of two or more products listed in Tables NN-1 and NN-2 
of this subpart. The annual volume of each NGL product supplied shall 
exclude any amount of that NGL contained in bulk NGLs exiting the 
facility (e.g., y-grade, o-grade, and other bulk NGLs). LDCs shall 
estimate CO2 emissions that would result from the complete 
combustion or oxidation of the natural gas received at the city gate 
(including natural gas that is transported by, but not owned by, the 
reporter) using Equation NN-1 of this section. For each product, use 
the default value for higher heating value and CO2 emission 
factor in Table NN-1 of this subpart. Alternatively, for each product, 
a reporter-specific higher heating value and CO2 emission 
factor may be used, in place of one or both defaults provided they are 
developed using methods outlined in Sec.  98.404. For each product, you 
must use the same volume unit throughout the equation.
* * * * *
CO2i = Annual CO2 mass emissions that would 
result from the combustion or oxidation of each product ``h'' for 
redelivery to all recipients (metric tons).
* * * * *
    (2) Calculation Methodology 2. NGL fractionators shall estimate 
CO2 emissions that would result from the complete combustion 
or oxidation of the product(s) supplied using Equation NN-2 of this 
section. The annual volume of each NGL product supplied 
(Fuelh) shall include any amount of that NGL supplied in a 
mixture or blend of two or more products listed in Tables NN-1 and NN-2 
of this subpart. The annual volume of each NGL product supplied shall 
exclude any amount of that NGL contained in bulk NGLs exiting the 
facility (e.g., y-grade, o-grade, and other bulk NGLs). LDCs shall 
estimate CO2 emissions that would result from the complete 
combustion or oxidation of the natural gas received at the city gate 
(including natural gas that is transported by, but not owned by, the 
reporter) using Equation NN-2 of this section. For each product, use 
the default CO2 emission factor found in Table NN-2 of this 
subpart. Alternatively, for each product, a reporter-specific 
CO2 emission factor may be used in place of the default 
factor, provided it is developed using methods outlined in Sec.  
98.404. For each

[[Page 89269]]

product, you must use the same volume unit throughout the equation.
* * * * *
CO2i = Annual CO2 mass emissions that would 
result from the combustion or oxidation of each product ``h'' 
(metric tons)
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
* * * * *
CO2j = Annual CO2 mass emissions that would 
result from the combustion or oxidation of natural gas for 
redelivery to transmission pipelines or other LDCs (metric tons).
Fuel = Total annual volume of natural gas supplied to downstream gas 
transmission pipelines and other local distribution companies (Mscf 
per year).
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    (ii) * * *
* * * * *
CO2k = Annual CO2 mass emissions that would 
result from the combustion or oxidation of natural gas delivered to 
each large end-user k, as defined in paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this 
section (metric tons).

* * * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) * * *
* * * * *
CO2l = Annual CO2 mass emissions that would 
result from the combustion or oxidation of the net change in natural 
gas stored on system by the LDC within the reporting year (metric 
tons).
* * * * *
EF = CO2 emission factor for natural gas placed into/
removed from storage (MT CO2/Mscf).
    (ii) * * *
* * * * *
CO2n = Annual CO2 mass emissions that would 
result from the combustion or oxidation of natural gas received that 
bypassed the city gate and is not otherwise accounted for by 
Equation NN-1 or NN-2 of this section (metric tons).
* * * * *
    (4) * * *
* * * * *
CO2 = Annual CO2 mass emissions that would 
result from the combustion or oxidation of natural gas delivered to 
LDC end-users not covered in paragraph (b)(2) of this section 
(metric tons).
CO2i = Annual CO2 mass emissions that would 
result from the combustion or oxidation of natural gas received at 
the city gate as calculated in paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this 
section (metric tons).
CO2j = Annual CO2 mass emissions that would 
result from the combustion or oxidation of natural gas delivered to 
transmission pipelines or other LDCs as calculated in paragraph 
(b)(1) of this section (metric tons).
CO2k = Annual CO2 mass emissions that would 
result from the combustion or oxidation of natural gas delivered to 
each large end-user as calculated in paragraph (b)(2) of this 
section (metric tons).
CO2l = Annual CO2 mass emissions that would 
result from the combustion or oxidation of the net change in natural 
gas stored by the LDC within the reported year as calculated in 
paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section (metric tons).
CO2n = Annual CO2 mass emissions that would 
result from the combustion or oxidation of natural gas that was 
received by the LDC directly from sources bypassing the city gate, 
and is not otherwise accounted for in Equation NN-1 or NN-2 of this 
section, as calculated in paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section 
(metric tons).

    (c) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (ii) * * *
* * * * *
CO2m = Annual CO2 mass emissions that would 
result from the combustion or oxidation of each fractionated NGL 
product ``g'' received from other fractionators (metric tons).
Fuelg = Total annual volume of each NGL product ``g'' 
received from other fractionators (bbls).
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
* * * * *
CO2 = Annual CO2 mass emissions that would 
result from the combustion or oxidation of fractionated NGLs 
delivered to customers or on behalf of customers less the quantity 
received from other fractionators (metric tons).
CO2i = Annual CO2 mass emissions that would 
result from the combustion or oxidation of fractionated NGLs 
delivered to all customers or on behalf of customers as calculated 
in paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this section (metric tons).
CO2m = Annual CO2 mass emissions that would 
result from the combustion or oxidation of fractionated NGLs 
received from other fractionators and calculated in paragraph (c)(1) 
of this section (metric tons).

0
81. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.404 by revising 
paragraphs (a)(1) introductory text and (a)(3) and (4) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.404  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

    (a) * * *
    (1) NGL fractionators and LDCs shall determine the quantity of NGLs 
and natural gas using methods in common use in the industry for billing 
purposes as audited under existing Sarbanes Oxley regulation.
* * * * *
    (3) NGL fractionators shall use measurement for NGLs at custody 
transfer meters or at such meters that are used to determine the NGL 
product slate delivered from the fractionation facility.
    (4) If a NGL fractionator supplies a product that is a mixture or 
blend of two or more products listed in Tables NN-1 and NN-2 of this 
subpart, the NGL fractionator shall report the quantities of the 
constituents of the mixtures or blends separately.
* * * * *

0
82. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.406 by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) and (a)(4)(ii);
0
b. Revising paragraphs (b)(1), (6), (12), and (b)(13) introductory 
text; and
0
c. Adding paragraph (b)(14).
    The revisions and addition read as follows:

Sec.  98.406  Data reporting requirements.

    (a) * * *
    (1) Annual quantity (in barrels) of each NGL product supplied 
(including fractionated NGL products received from other NGL 
fractionators) in the following product categories: Ethane, propane, 
normal butane, isobutane, and pentanes plus (Fuelh in 
Equations NN-1 and NN-2 of this subpart).
    (2) Annual quantity (in barrels) of each NGL product received from 
other NGL fractionators in the following product categories: Ethane, 
propane, normal butane, isobutane, and pentanes plus (Fuelg 
in Equation NN-7 of this subpart).
* * * * *
    (4) * * *
    (ii) Supplied to downstream users.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) Annual volume in Mscf of natural gas received by the LDC at its 
city gate stations for redelivery on the LDC's distribution system, 
including for use by the LDC (Fuelh in Equations NN-1 and 
NN-2 of this subpart).
* * * * *
    (6) Annual volume in Mscf of natural gas delivered to downstream 
gas transmission pipelines and other local distribution companies (Fuel 
in Equation NN-3 of this subpart).
* * * * *
    (12) For each large end-user reported in paragraph (b)(7) of this 
section, report:
    (i) The customer name, address, and meter number(s).
    (ii) Whether the quantity of natural gas reported in paragraph 
(b)(7) of this section is the total quantity delivered to a large end-
user's facility, or the quantity delivered to a specific meter located 
at the facility.
    (iii) If known, report the EIA identification number of each LDC 
customer.
    (13) The annual volume in Mscf of natural gas delivered by the LDC 
(including natural gas that is not owned

[[Page 89270]]

by the LDC) to each of the following end-use categories. For 
definitions of these categories, refer to EIA Form 176 (Annual Report 
of Natural Gas and Supplemental Gas Supply & Disposition) and 
Instructions.
* * * * *
    (14) The name of the U.S. state or territory covered in this report 
submission.
* * * * *

0
83. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Table NN-2 to subpart NN of part 
98 by revising the title to the table and the heading of the third 
column to read as follows:

  Table NN-2 to Subpart NN of Part 98--Default Factors for Calculation
                      Methodology 2 of This Subpart
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Default CO2
                                                        emission factor
              Fuel                        Unit          (MT CO2/Unit) 1
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Conditions for emission value presented in MT CO2/bbl are 60 [deg]F
  and saturation pressure.

Subpart OO--Suppliers of Industrial Greenhouse Gases

0
84. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.410 by revising paragraph 
(a) and adding paragraphs (d) and (e) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.410  Definition of the source category.

    (a) The industrial gas supplier source category consists of any 
facility that produces fluorinated GHGs or nitrous oxide; any bulk 
importer of fluorinated GHGs or nitrous oxide; and any bulk exporter of 
fluorinated GHGs or nitrous oxide. Starting with reporting year 2018, 
this source category also consists of any facility that produces 
fluorinated HTFs; any bulk importer of fluorinated HTFs; any bulk 
exporter of fluorinated HTFs; and any facility that destroys 
fluorinated GHGs or fluorinated HTFs.
* * * * *
    (d) To produce a fluorinated HTF means to manufacture, from any raw 
material or feedstock chemical, a fluorinated GHG used for temperature 
control, device testing, cleaning substrate surfaces and other parts, 
and soldering in processes including but not limited to certain types 
of electronics manufacturing production processes. Fluorinated heat 
transfer fluids do not include fluorinated GHGs used as lubricants or 
surfactants. For fluorinated heat transfer fluids under this subpart, 
the lower vapor pressure limit of 1 mm Hg in absolute at 25 [deg]C in 
the definition of fluorinated greenhouse gas in Sec.  98.6 shall not 
apply. Fluorinated heat transfer fluids include, but are not limited 
to, perfluoropolyethers, perfluoroalkanes, perfluoroethers, tertiary 
perfluoroamines, and perfluorocyclic ethers. Producing a fluorinated 
HTF does not include the reuse or recycling of a fluorinated HTF, the 
creation of intermediates, or the creation of fluorinated HTFs that are 
released or destroyed at the production facility before the production 
measurement at Sec.  98.414(a).
    (e) For purposes of this subpart, to destroy fluorinated GHGs or 
fluorinated HTFs means to cause the expiration of a previously produced 
(as defined in paragraphs (b) and (d) of this section) fluorinated GHG 
or fluorinated HTF to the destruction efficiency actually achieved. 
Such destruction does not result in a commercially useful end product. 
For purposes of this subpart, such destruction does not include HFC-23 
destruction as defined at Sec.  98.150 or the dissociation of 
fluorinated GHGs that occurs during electronics manufacturing as 
defined at Sec.  98.90. For example, such destruction does not include 
the dissociation of fluorinated GHGs that occurs during etch or chamber 
cleaning processes or during use of abatement systems that treat the 
fluorinated GHGs vented from such processes at electronics 
manufacturing facilities.

0
85. Effective January 1, 2018, revise Sec.  98.412 to read as follows

Sec.  98.412  GHGs to report.

    You must report the GHG emissions that would result from the 
release of the nitrous oxide and each fluorinated GHG that you produce, 
import, export, transform, or destroy during the calendar year. 
Starting with reporting year 2018, you must also report the emissions 
that would result from the release of each fluorinated HTF that is not 
also a fluorinated GHG and that you produce, import, export, transform, 
or destroy during the calendar year.

0
86. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.413 by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory text;
0
b. Revising the parameters of Equation OO-1 in paragraph (a);
0
c. Revising paragraph (b) introductory text;
0
d. Revising the parameters of Equation OO-2 in paragraph (b);
0
e. Revising paragraph (c) introductory text;
0
f. Revising parameters ``T'' and ``ET'' of Equation OO-3 in 
paragraph (c);
0
g. Revising paragraph (d) introductory text; and
0
h. Revising parameters ``D'' and ``FD'' of Equation OO-4 in 
paragraph (d).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.413  Calculating GHG emissions.

    (a) Calculate the total mass of the nitrous oxide and each 
fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF produced annually, except for 
amounts that are captured solely to be shipped off site for 
destruction, by using Equation OO-1 of this section:
* * * * *
P = Mass of fluorinated GHG, fluorinated HTF, or nitrous oxide 
produced annually.
Pp = Mass of fluorinated GHG, fluorinated HTF, or nitrous 
oxide produced over the period ``p''.

    (b) Calculate the total mass of the nitrous oxide and each 
fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF produced over the period ``p'' by 
using Equation OO-2 of this section:
* * * * *
Pp = Mass of fluorinated GHG, fluorinated HTF, or nitrous 
oxide produced over the period ``p'' (metric tons).
Op = Mass of fluorinated GHG, fluorinated HTF, or nitrous 
oxide that is measured coming out of the production process over the 
period p (metric tons).
Up = Mass of used fluorinated GHG, fluorinated HTF, or 
nitrous oxide that is added to the production process upstream of 
the output measurement over the period ``p'' (metric tons).

    (c) Calculate the total mass of the nitrous oxide and each 
fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF transformed by using Equation OO-3 
of this section:
* * * * *
T = Mass of fluorinated GHG, fluorinated HTF, or nitrous oxide 
transformed annually (metric tons).
* * * * *
ET = The fraction of the fluorinated GHG, fluorinated 
HTF, or nitrous oxide fed into the transformation process that is 
transformed in the process (metric tons).

    (d) Calculate the total mass of each fluorinated GHG or fluorinated 
HTF destroyed by using Equation OO-4 of this section:
* * * * *
D = Mass of fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF destroyed annually 
(metric tons).
FD = Mass of fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF fed into 
the destruction device annually (metric tons).
* * * * *

0
87. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.414 by revising 
paragraphs (a) through (i), (l), (n) introductory text, (n)(3) through 
(5), and (o) to read as follows:

[[Page 89271]]

Sec.  98.414  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

    (a) The mass of fluorinated GHGs, fluorinated HTFs, or nitrous 
oxide coming out of the production process shall be measured using 
flowmeters, weigh scales, or a combination of volumetric and density 
measurements with an accuracy and precision of one percent of full 
scale or better. If the measured mass includes more than one 
fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF, the concentrations of each of the 
fluorinated GHGs or fluorinated HTFs, other than low-concentration 
constituents, shall be measured as set forth in paragraph (n) of this 
section. For each fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF, the mean of the 
concentrations of that fluorinated GHG (mass fraction) measured under 
paragraph (n) shall be multiplied by the mass measurement to obtain the 
mass of that fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF coming out of the 
production process.
    (b) The mass of any used fluorinated GHGs, fluorinated HTFs, or 
used nitrous oxide added back into the production process upstream of 
the output measurement in paragraph (a) of this section shall be 
measured using flowmeters, weigh scales, or a combination of volumetric 
and density measurements with an accuracy and precision of one percent 
of full scale or better. If the mass in paragraph (a) is measured by 
weighing containers that include returned heels as well as newly 
produced fluorinated GHGs or fluorinated HTFs, the returned heels shall 
be considered used fluorinated GHGs or fluorinated HTFs for purposes of 
this paragraph (b) and Sec.  98.413(b).
    (c) The mass of fluorinated GHGs, fluorinated HTFs, or nitrous 
oxide fed into the transformation process shall be measured using 
flowmeters, weigh scales, or a combination of volumetric and density 
measurements with an accuracy and precision of one percent of full 
scale or better.
    (d) The fraction of the fluorinated GHGs, fluorinated HTFs, or 
nitrous oxide fed into the transformation process that is actually 
transformed shall be estimated considering yield calculations or 
quantities of unreacted fluorinated GHGs, fluorinated HTFs, or nitrous 
oxide permanently removed from the process and recovered, destroyed, or 
emitted.
    (e) The mass of fluorinated GHGs, fluorinated HTFs, or nitrous 
oxide sent to another facility for transformation shall be measured 
using flowmeters, weigh scales, or a combination of volumetric and 
density measurements with an accuracy and precision of one percent of 
full scale or better.
    (f) The mass of fluorinated GHGs or fluorinated HTFs sent to 
another facility for destruction shall be measured using flowmeters, 
weigh scales, or a combination of volumetric and density measurements 
with an accuracy and precision of one percent of full scale or better. 
If the measured mass includes more than trace concentrations of 
materials other than the fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF, the 
concentration of the fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF shall be 
estimated considering current or previous representative concentration 
measurements and other relevant process information. This concentration 
(mass fraction) shall be multiplied by the mass measurement to obtain 
the mass of the fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF sent to another 
facility for destruction.
    (g) You must estimate the share of the mass of fluorinated GHGs or 
fluorinated HTFs in paragraph (f) of this section that is comprised of 
fluorinated GHGs or fluorinated HTFs that are not included in the mass 
produced in Sec.  98.413(a) because they are removed from the 
production process as by-products or other wastes.
    (h) You must measure the mass of each fluorinated GHG or 
fluorinated HTF that is fed into the destruction device and that was 
previously produced as defined at Sec.  98.410(b). Such fluorinated 
GHGs or fluorinated HTFs include but are not limited to quantities that 
are shipped to the facility by another facility for destruction and 
quantities that are returned to the facility for reclamation but are 
found to be irretrievably contaminated and are therefore destroyed. You 
must use flowmeters, weigh scales, or a combination of volumetric and 
density measurements with an accuracy and precision of one percent of 
full scale or better. If the measured mass includes more than trace 
concentrations of materials other than the fluorinated GHG or 
fluorinated HTF being destroyed, you must estimate the concentrations 
of the fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF being destroyed considering 
current or previous representative concentration measurements and other 
relevant process information. You must multiply this concentration 
(mass fraction) by the mass measurement to obtain the mass of the 
fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF fed into the destruction device.
    (i) Very small quantities of fluorinated GHGs or fluorinated HTFs 
that are difficult to measure because they are entrained in other media 
such as destroyed filters and destroyed sample containers are exempt 
from paragraphs (f) and (h) of this section.
* * * * *
    (l) In their estimates of the mass of fluorinated GHGs or 
fluorinated HTFs destroyed, facilities that destroy fluorinated GHGs or 
fluorinated HTFs shall account for any temporary reductions in the 
destruction efficiency that result from any startups, shutdowns, or 
malfunctions of the destruction device, including departures from the 
operating conditions defined in state or local permitting requirements 
and/or oxidizer manufacturer specifications.
* * * * *
    (n) If the mass coming out of the production process includes more 
than one fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF, you shall measure the 
concentrations of all of the fluorinated GHGs or fluorinated HTFs, 
other than low-concentration constituents, as follows:
* * * * *
    (3) Frequency of measurement. Perform the measurements at least 
once by February 15, 2011 if the fluorinated GHG product is being 
produced on December 17, 2010. Perform the measurements within 60 days 
of commencing production of any fluorinated GHG product that was not 
being produced on December 17, 2010. For fluorinated HTF products that 
are not also fluorinated GHG products, perform the measurements at 
least once by February 28, 2018, if the fluorinated HTF product is 
being produced on January 1, 2018. Perform the measurements within 60 
days of commencing production of any fluorinated HTF product that was 
not being produced on January 1, 2018. Repeat the measurements if an 
operational or process change occurs that could change the identities 
or significantly change the concentrations of the fluorinated GHG or 
fluorinated HTF constituents of the fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF 
product. Complete the repeat measurements within 60 days of the 
operational or process change.
    (4) Measure all product grades. Where a fluorinated GHG or 
fluorinated HTF is produced at more than one purity level (e.g., 
pharmaceutical grade and refrigerant grade), perform the measurements 
for each purity level.
    (5) Number of samples. Analyze a minimum of three samples of the 
fluorinated GHGs or fluorinated HTF product that have been drawn under 
conditions that are representative of the process producing the 
fluorinated GHGs or fluorinated HTF product. If the

[[Page 89272]]

relative standard deviation of the measured concentrations of any of 
the fluorinated GHGs or fluorinated HTF constituents (other than low-
concentration constituents) is greater than or equal to 15 percent, 
draw and analyze enough additional samples to achieve a total of at 
least six samples of the fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF product.
    (o) All analytical equipment used to determine the concentration of 
fluorinated GHGs or fluorinated HTFs, including but not limited to gas 
chromatographs and associated detectors, IR, FTIR and NMR devices, 
shall be calibrated at a frequency needed to support the type of 
analysis specified in the site GHG Monitoring Plan as required under 
paragraph (n) of this section and Sec.  98.3(g)(5). Quality assurance 
samples at the concentrations of concern shall be used for the 
calibration. Such quality assurance samples shall consist of or be 
prepared from certified standards of the analytes of concern where 
available; if not available, calibration shall be performed by a method 
specified in the GHG Monitoring Plan.
* * * * *

0
88. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.416 by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a);
0
b. Revising paragraphs (b) introductory text and (b)(3) and (6);
0
c. Adding paragraph (b)(7);
0
d. Revising paragraphs (c) introductory text, (c)(1) through (6), and 
(c)(8) through (10);
0
e. Revising paragraphs (d) introductory text, (d)(1), and (d)(4) 
through (6); and
0
f. Adding paragraphs (i) and (j).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  98.416   Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (a) Each fluorinated GHG, fluorinated HTF, or nitrous oxide 
production facility shall report the following information:
    (1) Mass in metric tons of nitrous oxide and each fluorinated GHG 
or fluorinated HTF produced at that facility by process, except for 
amounts that are captured solely to be shipped off site for 
destruction.
    (2) Mass in metric tons of nitrous oxide and each fluorinated GHG 
or fluorinated HTF transformed at that facility, by process.
    (3) Mass in metric tons of each fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF 
that is destroyed at that facility and that was previously produced as 
defined at Sec.  98.410(b). Quantities to be reported under paragraph 
(a)(3) of this section include but are not limited to quantities that 
are shipped to the facility by another facility for destruction and 
quantities that are returned to the facility for reclamation but are 
found to be irretrievably contaminated and are therefore destroyed.
    (4) [Reserved]
    (5) Total mass in metric tons of nitrous oxide and each fluorinated 
GHG or fluorinated HTF sent to another facility for transformation.
    (6) Total mass in metric tons of each fluorinated GHG or 
fluorinated HTF sent to another facility for destruction, except 
fluorinated GHGs and fluorinated HTFs that are not included in the mass 
produced in Sec.  98.413(a) because they are removed from the 
production process as byproducts or other wastes. Quantities to be 
reported under paragraph (a)(6) of this section could include, for 
example, fluorinated GHGs that are returned to the facility for 
reclamation but are found to be irretrievably contaminated and are 
therefore sent to another facility for destruction.
    (7) Total mass in metric tons of each fluorinated GHG or 
fluorinated HTF that is sent to another facility for destruction and 
that is not included in the mass produced in Sec.  98.413(a) because it 
is removed from the production process as a byproduct or other waste.
    (8)-(9) [Reserved]
    (10) Mass in metric tons of nitrous oxide and each fluorinated GHG 
or fluorinated HTF fed into the transformation process, by process.
    (11) Mass in metric tons of each fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF 
that is fed into the destruction device and that was previously 
produced as defined at Sec.  98.410(b). Quantities to be reported under 
paragraph (a)(11) of this section include but are not limited to 
quantities that are shipped to the facility by another facility for 
destruction and quantities that are returned to the facility for 
reclamation but are found to be irretrievably contaminated and are 
therefore destroyed.
    (12) Mass in metric tons of nitrous oxide and each fluorinated GHG 
or fluorinated HTF that is measured coming out of the production 
process, by process.
    (13) Mass in metric tons of used nitrous oxide and of each used 
fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF added back into the production 
process (e.g., for reclamation), including returned heels in containers 
that are weighed to measure the mass in Sec.  98.414(a), by process.
    (14) Names and addresses of facilities to which any nitrous oxide, 
fluorinated GHGs, or fluorinated HTFs were sent for transformation, and 
the quantities (metric tons) of nitrous oxide and of each fluorinated 
GHG or fluorinated HTF that were sent to each for transformation.
    (15) Names and addresses of facilities to which any fluorinated 
GHGs or fluorinated HTFs were sent for destruction, and the quantities 
(metric tons) of each fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF that were sent 
to each for destruction.
    (16) Where missing data have been estimated pursuant to Sec.  
98.415, the reason the data were missing, the length of time the data 
were missing, the method used to estimate the missing data, and the 
estimates of those data.
    (b) Any facility or importer that destroys fluorinated GHGs or 
fluorinated HTFs shall submit a one-time report containing the 
information in paragraphs (b)(1) through (6) of this section for each 
destruction process by the applicable date set forth in paragraph 
(b)(7) of this section. Facilities and importers that previously 
submitted one-time reports under this paragraph for all destruction 
devices used to destroy fluorinated GHGs or fluorinated HTFs are exempt 
from this requirement unless they meet the conditions in paragraph 
(b)(6) of this section.
* * * * *
    (3) Methods used to record the mass of fluorinated GHG or 
fluorinated HTF destroyed.
* * * * *
    (6) If any process changes (including the acquisition of a new 
destruction device) affect unit destruction efficiency or the methods 
used to record the mass of fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF 
destroyed, then a revised report must be submitted to reflect the 
changes. The revised report must be submitted to EPA within 60 days of 
the change.
    (7)(i) Any fluorinated GHG production facility or importer that 
destroys fluorinated GHGs must submit the one-time destruction report 
by March 31, 2011 or within 60 days of commencing fluorinated GHG 
destruction, whichever is later.
    (ii) Any fluorinated GHG production facility or importer that 
destroys fluorinated HTFs that are not also fluorinated GHGs must 
submit the one-time destruction report by March 31, 2019 or within 60 
days of commencing fluorinated HTF destruction, whichever is later.
    (iii) Any facility that destroys fluorinated GHGs or fluorinated 
HTFs but does not produce or import fluorinated GHGs must submit the 
one-time destruction report by March 31,

[[Page 89273]]

2019 or within 60 days of commencing fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF 
destruction, whichever is later.
    (c) Each bulk importer of fluorinated GHGs, fluorinated HTFs, or 
nitrous oxide shall submit an annual report that summarizes its imports 
at the corporate level, except for shipments including less than 
twenty-five kilograms of fluorinated GHGs, fluorinated HTFs, or nitrous 
oxide, transshipments, and heels that meet the conditions set forth at 
Sec.  98.417(e). The report shall contain the following information for 
each import:
    (1) Total mass in metric tons of nitrous oxide and each fluorinated 
GHG or fluorinated HTF imported in bulk, including each fluorinated GHG 
or fluorinated HTF constituent of the fluorinated GHG or fluorinated 
HTF product that makes up between 0.5 percent and 100 percent of the 
product by mass.
    (2) Total mass in metric tons of nitrous oxide and each fluorinated 
GHG or fluorinated HTF imported in bulk and sold or transferred to 
persons other than the importer for use in processes resulting in the 
transformation or destruction of the chemical.
    (3) Date on which the fluorinated GHGs, fluorinated HTFs, or 
nitrous oxide were imported.
    (4) Port of entry through which the fluorinated GHGs, fluorinated 
HTFs, or nitrous oxide passed.
    (5) Country from which the imported fluorinated GHGs, fluorinated 
HTFs, or nitrous oxide were imported.
    (6) Commodity code of the fluorinated GHGs, fluorinated HTFs, or 
nitrous oxide shipped.
* * * * *
    (8) Total mass in metric tons of each fluorinated GHG or 
fluorinated HTF destroyed by the importer.
    (9) If applicable, the names and addresses of the persons and 
facilities to which the nitrous oxide, fluorinated GHGs, or fluorinated 
HTFs were sold or transferred for transformation, and the quantities 
(metric tons) of nitrous oxide and of each fluorinated GHG or 
fluorinated HTF that were sold or transferred to each facility for 
transformation.
    (10) If applicable, the names and addresses of the persons and 
facilities to which the fluorinated GHGs or fluorinated HTFs were sold 
or transferred for destruction, and the quantities (metric tons) of 
each fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF that were sold or transferred 
to each facility for destruction.
    (d) Each bulk exporter of fluorinated GHGs, fluorinated HTFs, or 
nitrous oxide shall submit an annual report that summarizes its exports 
at the corporate level, except for shipments including less than 
twenty-five kilograms of fluorinated GHGs, fluorinated HTFs, or nitrous 
oxide, transshipments, and heels. The report shall contain the 
following information for each export:
    (1) Total mass in metric tons of nitrous oxide and each fluorinated 
GHG or fluorinated HTF exported in bulk.
* * * * *
    (4) Commodity code of the fluorinated GHGs, fluorinated HTFs, or 
nitrous oxide shipped.
    (5) Date on which, and the port from which, the fluorinated GHGs, 
fluorinated HTFs, or nitrous oxide were exported from the United States 
or its territories.
    (6) Country to which the fluorinated GHGs, fluorinated HTFs, or 
nitrous oxide were exported.
* * * * *
    (i) Each facility that destroys fluorinated GHGs or fluorinated 
HTFs but does not otherwise report under this section shall report the 
mass in metric tons of each fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF that is 
destroyed at that facility and that was previously produced as defined 
at Sec.  98.410(b) or (d), as applicable. Quantities to be reported 
under this paragraph (i) include but are not limited to quantities that 
are shipped to the facility by another facility for destruction and 
quantities that are returned to the facility for reclamation but are 
found to be irretrievably contaminated and are therefore destroyed.
    (j) By March 31, 2019, all facilities that produce fluorinated HTFs 
that are not also fluorinated GHGs shall submit a one-time report that 
includes the concentration of each fluorinated HTF or fluorinated GHG 
constituent in each fluorinated HTF product as measured under Sec.  
98.414(n). If the facility commences production of a fluorinated HTF 
product that was not included in the initial report or performs a 
repeat measurement under Sec.  98.414(n) that shows that the identities 
or concentrations of the fluorinated HTF or fluorinated GHG 
constituents of a fluorinated HTF product have changed, then the new or 
changed concentrations, as well as the date of the change, must be 
provided in a revised report. The revised report must be submitted to 
EPA by the March 31st that immediately follows the new or repeat 
measurement under Sec.  98.414(n).

0
89. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.417 by revising 
paragraphs (a) introductory text, (a)(3) and (4), and (b) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.417   Records that must be retained.

    (a) In addition to the data required by Sec.  98.3(g), the 
fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF production facility shall retain the 
following records:
* * * * *
    (3) Dated records of the total mass in metric tons of each reactant 
fed into the fluorinated GHG, fluorinated HTF, or nitrous oxide 
production process, by process.
    (4) Dated records of the total mass in metric tons of the 
reactants, by-products, and other wastes permanently removed from the 
fluorinated GHG, fluorinated HTF, or nitrous oxide production process, 
by process.
    (b) In addition to the data required by paragraph (a) of this 
section, any facility that destroys fluorinated GHGs or fluorinated 
HTFs shall keep records of test reports and other information 
documenting the facility's one-time destruction efficiency report in 
Sec.  98.416(b).
* * * * *

0
90. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.418 by revising the 
definition of ``Low-concentration constituent'' to read as follows:

Sec.  98.418   Definitions.

* * * * *
    Low-concentration constituent means, for purposes of fluorinated 
GHG or fluorinated HTF production and export, a fluorinated GHG or 
fluorinated HTF constituent of a fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF 
product that occurs in the product in concentrations below 0.1 percent 
by mass. For purposes of fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF import, 
low-concentration constituent means a fluorinated GHG or fluorinated 
HTF constituent of a fluorinated GHG or fluorinated HTF product that 
occurs in the product in concentrations below 0.5 percent by mass. Low-
concentration constituents do not include fluorinated GHGs or 
fluorinated HTFs that are deliberately combined with the product (e.g., 
to affect the performance characteristics of the product).

Subpart PP--Suppliers of Carbon Dioxide

0
91. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.425 by revising paragraph 
(b) introductory text to read as follows:

Sec.  98.425  Procedures for estimating missing data.

* * * * *
    (b) Whenever the quality assurance procedures in Sec.  98.424(b) 
cannot be followed to determine concentration of the CO2 
stream, the most appropriate of

[[Page 89274]]

the following missing data procedures shall be followed:
* * * * *

Subpart TT--Industrial Waste Landfills

0
92. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Table TT-1 to subpart TT of part 
98 by:
0
a. Removing the entry ``Pulp and Paper (other than industrial 
sludge)'';
0
b. Adding a heading entry for ``Pulp and Paper Industry:''; subheading 
``Pulp and paper wastes segregated into separate streams:''; 
subordinate entries for ``Boiler Ash'', ``Wastewater Sludge'', ``Kraft 
Recovery Wastes'', and ``Other Pulp and Paper Wastes (not otherwise 
listed)''; subheading ``Pulp and paper wastes not segregated into 
separate streams:''; and subordinate entry for ``Pulp and paper 
manufacturing wastes, general (other than industrial sludge).''
0
c. Revising the entry ``Industrial Sludge'' and footnote a; and
0
d. Adding footnotes ``b'' and ``c''.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

      Table TT-1 to Subpart TT of Part 98--Default DOC and Decay Rate Values for Industrial Waste Landfills
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         DOC (weight                           k [moderate
         Industry/waste type            fraction, wet      k [dry climate   climate \a\] (yr -   k [wet climate
                                            basis)          \a\] (yr -1)            1)            \a\] (yr -1)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Pulp and Paper Industry:
    Pulp and paper wastes segregated
     into separate streams:
        Boiler Ash..................               0.06               0.02               0.03               0.04
        Wastewater Sludge...........               0.12               0.02               0.04               0.06
        Kraft Recovery Wastes \b\...              0.025               0.02               0.03               0.04
        Other Pulp and Paper Wastes                0.20               0.02               0.03               0.04
         (not otherwise listed).....
    Pulp and paper wastes not
     segregated into separate
     streams:
        Pulp and paper manufacturing               0.15               0.02               0.03               0.04
         wastes, general (other than
         industrial sludge).........
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Industrial Sludge \c\...............               0.09               0.02               0.04               0.06
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ The applicable climate classification is determined based on the annual rainfall plus the recirculated
  leachate application rate. Recirculated leachate application rate (in inches/year) is the total volume of
  leachate recirculated from company records or engineering estimates and applied to the landfill divided by the
  area of the portion of the landfill containing waste [with appropriate unit conversions].
Dry climate = precipitation plus recirculated leachate less than 20 inches/year;
Moderate climate = precipitation plus recirculated leachate from 20 to 40 inches/year (inclusive);
Wet climate = precipitation plus recirculated leachate greater than 40 inches/year.
Alternatively, landfills that use leachate recirculation can elect to use the k value for wet climate rather
  than calculating the recirculated leachate rate.
\b\ Kraft Recovery Wastes include green liquor dregs, slaker grits, and lime mud, which may also be referred to
  collectively as causticizing or recausticizing wastes.
\c\ A facility that can segregate out pulp and paper industry wastewater sludge must apply the 0.12 DOC value to
  that portion of the sludge.

Subpart UU--Injection of Carbon Dioxide

0
93. Effective January 1, 2018, amend Sec.  98.474 by revising paragraph 
(c)(2) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.474  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) You must convert all measured volumes of CO2 to the 
following standard industry temperature and pressure conditions for use 
in Equation UU-2 of this subpart: Standard cubic meters at a 
temperature of 60 degrees Fahrenheit and at an absolute pressure of 1 
atmosphere.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-28564 Filed 12-8-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P