Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934-0129
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: 2013 Revisions to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting and Final Confidentiality Determinations: New or Substantially Revised Data Elements
Posted Date: 2013-11-29T05:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 230 (Friday, November 29, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 71903-71981]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-27996]

[[Page 71903]]

Vol. 78

Friday,

No. 230

November 29, 2013

Part VI

Environmental Protection Agency

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

40 CFR Part 98

2013 Revisions to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule and Final 
Confidentiality Determinations for New or Substantially Revised Data 
Elements; Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 78 , No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 2013 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 71904]]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 98

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934; FRL-9902-95-OAR ]
RIN 2060-AR52

2013 Revisions to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule and Final 
Confidentiality Determinations for New or Substantially Revised Data 
Elements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is amending the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule to 
implement technical corrections, clarifying revisions, and other 
amendments to improve the quality and consistency of the data collected 
by the EPA. Among other changes, the EPA is amending the Rule's table 
of global warming potentials to revise the values for certain 
greenhouse gases. This action also establishes confidentiality 
determinations for the reporting of new or substantially revised data 
elements (i.e., requiring additional or different data to be reported) 
contained in these final amendments to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Rule.

DATES: This final rule is effective on January 1, 2014.

ADDRESSES: 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, 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 GENERAL 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) 343-9263; fax number: (202) 343-2342; email 
address: GHGReportingRule@epa.gov. For technical information, please go 
to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule Program Web site http://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/index.html. To submit a question, select Rule 
Help Center, followed by Contact Us.
    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. Following the Administrator's signature, a copy of this action 
will be posted on EPA's greenhouse gas reporting rule Web site at 
http://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/index.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    Regulated Entities. The Administrator determined that this action 
is subject to the provisions of Clean Air Act (CAA) section 307(d). See 
CAA section 307(d)(1)(V) (the provisions of CAA section 307(d) apply to 
``such other actions as the Administrator may determine''). These are 
amendments to existing regulations and affect certain owners and 
operators of facilities that directly emit greenhouse gases (GHGs) as 
well as certain suppliers. Regulated categories and examples of 
affected entities include 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.
Electricity Generation.........          221112  Fossil-fuel fired
                                                  electric generating
                                                  units, including units
                                                  owned by federal and
                                                  municipal governments
                                                  and units located in
                                                  Indian Country.
Acid Gas Injection Projects....       211111 or  Projects that inject
                                         211112   natural 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.
Cement Production..............          327310  Portland cement
                                                  manufacturing plants.
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.
Electrical Equipment                      33531  Power transmission and
 Manufacture or Refurbishment.                    distribution
                                                  switchgear and
                                                  specialty transformers
                                                  manufacturing
                                                  facilities.
Electronics Manufacturing......          334111  Microcomputers
                                                  manufacturing
                                                  facilities.
                                         334413  Semiconductor,
                                                  photovoltaic (solid-
                                                  state) device
                                                  manufacturing
                                                  facilities.
                                         334419  LCD unit screens
                                                  manufacturing
                                                  facilities. MEMS
                                                  manufacturing
                                                  facilities.
Ethanol Production.............          325193  Ethyl alcohol
                                                  manufacturing
                                                  facilities.
Ferroalloy Production..........          331112  Ferroalloys
                                                  manufacturing
                                                  facilities.
Fluorinated GHG Production.....          325120  Industrial gases
                                                  manufacturing
                                                  facilities.
Food Processing................          311611  Meat processing
                                                  facilities.

[[Page 71905]]

 
                                         311411  Frozen fruit, juice,
                                                  and vegetable
                                                  manufacturing
                                                  facilities.
                                         311421  Fruit and vegetable
                                                  canning facilities.
Glass Production...............          327211  Flat glass
                                                  manufacturing
                                                  facilities.
                                         327213  Glass container
                                                  manufacturing
                                                  facilities.
                                         327212  Other pressed and blown
                                                  glass and glassware
                                                  manufacturing
                                                  facilities.
GS Sites.......................              NA  CO2 geologic
                                                  sequestration
                                                  projects.
HFC-22 Production and HFC-23             325120  Chlorodifluoromethane
 Destruction.                                     manufacturing
                                                  facilities.
Hydrogen Production............          325120  Hydrogen manufacturing
                                                  facilities.
Importers and Exporters of Pre-          423730  Air-conditioning
 charged Equipment and Closed-           333415   equipment (except room
 Cell Foams.                                      units) merchant
                                                  wholesalers.
                                                 Air-conditioning
                                                  equipment (except
                                                  motor vehicle)
                                                  manufacturing.
                                         423620  Air-conditioners, room,
                                                  merchant wholesalers.
                                         443111  Household Appliance
                                                  Stores.
                                         326150  Polyurethane foam
                                                  products
                                                  manufacturing.
                                         335313  Circuit breakers,
                                                  power, manufacturing.
                                         423610  Circuit breakers
                                                  merchant wholesalers.
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.
Industrial Wastewater Treatment          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.
                                         325193  Ethanol manufacturing
                                                  facilities.
                                         324110  Petroleum refineries.
Iron and Steel Production......          331111  Integrated iron and
                                                  steel mills, steel
                                                  companies, sinter
                                                  plants, blast
                                                  furnaces, basic oxygen
                                                  process furnace shops.
Lead Production................          331419  Primary lead smelting
                                                  and refining
                                                  facilities.
                                         331492  Secondary lead smelting
                                                  and refining
                                                  facilities.
Lime Production................          327410  Calcium oxide, calcium
                                                  hydroxide, dolomitic
                                                  hydrates manufacturing
                                                  facilities.
Magnesium Production...........          331419  Primary refiners of
                                                  nonferrous metals by
                                                  electrolytic methods.
Municipal Solid Waste Landfills          562212  Solid waste landfills.
                                         221320  Sewage treatment
                                                  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.
Petroleum Refineries...........          324110  Petroleum refineries.
Petroleum and Natural Gas                486210  Pipeline transportation
 Systems.                                         of natural gas.
                                         221210  Natural gas
                                                  distribution
                                                  facilities.
                                            211  Extractors of crude
                                                  petroleum and natural
                                                  gas.
                                         211112  Natural gas liquid
                                                  extraction facilities.
Phosphoric Acid Production.....          325312  Phosphoric acid
                                                  manufacturing
                                                  facilities.
Pulp and Paper Manufacturing...          322110  Pulp mills.
                                         322121  Paper mills.
                                         322130  Paperboard mills.
Soda Ash Manufacturing.........          325181  Alkalies and chlorine
                                                  manufacturing
                                                  facilities.
Silicon Carbide Production.....          327910  Silicon carbide
                                                  abrasives
                                                  manufacturing
                                                  facilities.
Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) from           221121  Electric bulk power
 Electrical Equipment.                            transmission and
                                                  control facilities.
Titanium Dioxide Production....          325188  Titanium dioxide
                                                  manufacturing
                                                  facilities.
Underground Coal Mines.........          212113  Underground anthracite
                                                  coal mining
                                                  operations.
                                         212112  Underground bituminous
                                                  coal mining
                                                  operations.
Zinc Production................          331419  Primary zinc refining
                                                  facilities.
                                         331492  Zinc dust reclaiming
                                                  facilities, recovering
                                                  from scrap and/or
                                                  alloying purchased
                                                  metals.
Suppliers of Industrial                  325120  Industrial gas
 Greenhouse Gases.                                manufacturing
                                                  facilities.
Suppliers of Petroleum Products          324110  Petroleum refineries.
Suppliers of Natural Gas and             221210  Natural gas
 Natural Gas Liquids.                             distribution
                                                  facilities.
                                         211112  Natural gas liquid
                                                  extraction facilities.
Suppliers of Carbon Dioxide              325120  Industrial gas
 (CO2).                                           manufacturing
                                                  facilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 71906]]

    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. Types of facilities different from 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 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.
    What is the effective date? The final rule is effective on January 
1, 2014. 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. 
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. EPA is nevertheless acting 
consistently with the purposes underlying APA section 553(d) in making 
this rule effective on January 1, 2014. Section 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) 
allows an effective date less than 30 days after publication ``as 
otherwise provided by the agency for good cause found and published 
with the rule.'' As explained below, EPA finds that there is good cause 
for this rule to become effective on January 1, 2014, even though this 
may result in an effective date fewer than 30 days from date of 
publication in the Federal Register.
    While this action is being signed prior to December 1, 2013, there 
is likely to be a significant delay in the publication of this rule as 
it contains complex equations and tables and is relatively long. As an 
example, then-Acting Administrator Bob Perciasepe signed the proposed 
2013 Revisions Rule on March 8, 2013, but the proposed rule was not 
published in the Federal Register until April 2, 2013. Further, we 
anticipate that the partial federal government shutdown from October 1 
to October 16, 2013, may have caused a backlog in the Federal Register 
publication process that may cause additional delays. The purpose of 
the 30-day waiting period prescribed in 5 U.S.C. 553(d) is to give 
affected parties a reasonable time to adjust their behavior and prepare 
before the final rule takes effect.
    To employ the 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) ``good cause'' exemption, an 
agency must ``balance the necessity for immediate implementation 
against principles of fundamental fairness which require that all 
affected persons be afforded a reasonable amount of time to prepare for 
the effective date of its ruling.'' \1\ Where, as here, the final rule 
will be signed and made available on the EPA Web site more than 30 days 
before the effective date, but where the publication is likely to be 
delayed due to the complexity and length of the rule, the regulated 
entities are afforded this reasonable amount of time. This is 
particularly true given that most of the revisions being made in this 
package provide flexibilities to sources covered by the reporting rule 
or require no additional action by affected sources. Those amendments 
that increase burden affect a very small number of new facilities and 
include flexibility provisions such as Best Available Monitoring 
Methods. We balance these circumstances with the need for the 
amendments to be effective by January 1, 2014; a delayed effective day 
would result in regulatory uncertainty, program disruption, and an 
inability to have the amendments (many of which clarify requirements, 
relieve burden, and/or are made at the request of the regulated 
facilities) effective for the 2014 reporting year. Accordingly, we find 
good cause exists to make this rule effective on January 1, 2014, 
consistent with the purposes of 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Omnipoint Corp. v. FCC, 78 F3d 620, 630 (D.C. Cir. 1996), 
quoting U.S. v. Gavrilovic, 551 F.2d 1099, 1105 (8th Cir. 1977).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 January 28, 2014. 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, William 
Jefferson Clinton 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.

APA Administrative Procedure Act
AR4 Fourth Assessment Report
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
BACT Best available control technology
BAMM best available monitoring methods
CAA Clean Air Act
CAMD Clean Air Markets Division
CBI confidential business information
CEMS continuous emissions monitoring system
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CH4 methane
CO2 carbon dioxide
CO2e carbon dioxide equivalent
DOC degradable organic carbon
DOE Department of Energy
EAF electric arc furnace
e-GGRT Electronic Greenhouse Gas Reporting Tool
EIA Energy Information Administration
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FBC fluidized bed combustor
FLIGHT Facility Level Information on Green House Gases Tool
FR Federal Register
F-GHG fluorinated greenhouse gas
F-HTF fluorinated heat transfer fluid
GHG greenhouse gas
GHGRP Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program
GWP global warming potential
HFC hydrofluorocarbon
Hg mercury
HHV high heat value
HQ Headquarters
ICR Information Collection Request
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
ISBN International Standard Book Number
LDC Local Distribution Company
LPG liquid petroleum gases
Mscf thousand standard cubic feet
MSHA Mine Safety and Health Administration
MSW municipal solid waste
N2O nitrous oxide
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

[[Page 71907]]

NGL natural gas liquid
NSPS New Source Review Performance Standards
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
OAQPS Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
OMB Office of Management and Budget
ORIS Office of the Regulatory Information System
PAL plant-wide applicability limits
PFC perfluorocarbon
PSD prevention of significant deterioration
PTE potential to emit
QA/QC quality assurance/quality control
R&D Research and Development
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
SAR Second Assessment Report
SF6 sulfur hexafluoride
SIP State implementation plan
TAR Third Assessment Report
TPY tons per year
UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
U.S. United States
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
XML extensible markup language

    Organization of This Document. The following outline is provided to 
aid in locating information in this preamble.

I. Background
    A. How is this preamble organized?
    B. Background on the Action
    C. Legal Authority
    D. What GWP values are addressed in this notice?
II. Overview of Final Corrections and Other Amendments and Responses 
to Public Comment
    A. Subpart A--General Provisions
    a. Summary of Comments and Responses on the Revision of the 
GHGRP to Complement the Inventory and the Use of IPCC AR4 GWPs
    B. Subpart C--General Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources
    C. Subpart H--Cement Production
    D. Subpart K--Ferroalloy Production
    E. Subpart L--Fluorinated Gas Production
    F. Subpart N--Glass Production
    G. Subpart O--HFC-22 Production and HFC-23 Destruction
    H. Subpart P--Hydrogen Production
    I. Subpart Q--Iron and Steel Production
    J. Subpart W--Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems
    K. Subpart X--Petrochemical Production
    L. Subpart Y--Petroleum Refineries
    M. Subpart Z--Phosphoric Acid Production
    N. Subpart AA--Pulp and Paper Manufacturing
    O. Subpart BB--Silicon Carbide Production
    P. Subpart DD--Electrical Transmission and Distribution 
Equipment Use
    Q. Subpart FF--Underground Coal Mines
    R. Subpart HH--Municipal Solid Waste Landfills
    S. Subpart LL--Suppliers of Coal-Based Liquid Fuels
    T. Subpart MM--Suppliers of Petroleum Products
    U. Subpart NN--Suppliers of Natural Gas and Natural Gas Liquids
    V. Subpart PP--Suppliers of Carbon Dioxide
    W. Subpart QQ--Importers and Exporters of Fluorinated Greenhouse 
Gases Contained in Pre-Charged Equipment or Closed-Cell Foams
    X. Subpart RR--Geologic Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide
    Y. Subpart SS--Electrical Equipment Manufacture or Refurbishment
    Z. Subpart TT--Industrial Waste Landfills
    AA. Subpart UU--Injection of Carbon Dioxide
    BB. Other Technical Corrections
    CC. Subpart I Correction
III. Schedule for the Final Amendments and Republication of Emission 
Estimates for Prior Year Reports
    A. Schedule for Final Amendments and Significant Comments
    B. Republication of Emissions Estimates for Prior Year Reports 
and Significant Comments
IV. Confidentiality Determinations
    A. Final Confidentiality Determinations for New and Revised Data 
Elements
    B. Public Comments on the Proposed Confidentiality 
Determinations and Responses to Public Comment
V. Impacts of the Final Rule
    A. Impacts of the Final Amendments Due to Revised Global Warming 
Potentials
    B. What are the impacts of the other amendments and revisions in 
this final rule?
    C. Summary of Comments and Responses Regarding Impacts
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
    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 provides background information 
regarding the origin of the final amendments. This section also 
discusses the EPA's legal authority under the Clean Air Act to 
promulgate and amend the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule (40 CFR part 98, 
hereinafter referred to as ``Part 98''). Section II of this preamble 
contains information on the final revisions to Part 98 and is organized 
by Part 98 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 III of this preamble discusses the 
effective date of the revisions for new and existing reporters and the 
EPA's intent to publish a version of the Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Program (GHGRP) data for the reporting years 2010, 2011, and 2012 to 
reflect a consistent time-series. Section IV of this preamble discusses 
the confidentiality determinations for new or substantially revised 
(i.e., requiring additional or different data to be reported) data 
reporting elements. Section V of this preamble discusses the impacts of 
the final amendments, including the impact of revised global warming 
potentials (GWPs) on new and existing reporters. Finally, Section VI of 
this preamble describes the statutory and executive order requirements 
applicable to this action.

B. Background on the Action

    Part 98 was initially published in the Federal Register on October 
30, 2009 (74 FR 56260). Part 98 became effective on December 29, 2009, 
and requires reporting of GHGs from certain facilities and suppliers. 
Subsequent notices were published in 2010 promulgating the requirements 
for subparts T, FF, II, and TT (75 FR 39736, July 12, 2010); subparts 
I, L, DD, QQ, and SS (75 FR 74774, December 1, 2010); and subparts RR 
and UU (75 FR 75060, December 1, 2010). A number of subparts have been 
revised since promulgation (75 FR 79092, December 17, 2010; 76 FR 
73866, November 29, 2011;77 FR 10373, February 22, 2012; 77 FR 51477, 
August 24, 2012; and subpart I, signed by the Administrator on August 
16, 2013).
    On April 2, 2013, the EPA proposed amendments to provisions in Part 
98 in the ``2013 Revisions to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule and 
Proposed Confidentiality Determinations for New or Substantially 
Revised Data Elements'' (hereinafter ``2013 Revisions proposal'') (77 
FR 19802). The EPA is finalizing those amendments in this action, with 
certain changes following consideration of comments submitted. 
Responses to significant comments submitted on the proposed amendments 
can be found in Section II of this preamble.

C. Legal Authority

    The EPA is finalizing these rule amendments under its existing CAA

[[Page 71908]]

authority provided in CAA section 114. As stated in the preamble to the 
2009 final GHG reporting rule (74 FR 56260, October 30, 2009), CAA 
section 114(a)(1) provides the EPA broad authority to require the 
information required to be gathered by this rule because such data 
inform and are relevant to the EPA's carrying out a wide variety of CAA 
provisions. See the preambles to the proposed (74 FR 16448, April 10, 
2009) and final Part 98 (74 FR 56260) for further information.
    In addition, the EPA is finalizing confidentiality determinations 
for certain new or substantially revised data elements required under 
the proposed GHG Reporting Rule under its authorities provided in 
sections 114, 301 and 307 of the CAA. As mentioned above, CAA section 
114 provides the EPA authority to collect the information in Part 98. 
Section 114(c) requires that EPA make publicly available information 
obtained under 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.

D. What GWP values are addressed in this notice?

    In the 2013 Revisions proposal, the EPA proposed to amend Table A-1 
to Subpart A, General Provisions, Part 98 (hereinafter referred to as 
``Table A-1'') to revise the GWP values for certain GHGs that have been 
included in the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) 
Fourth Assessment Report (hereinafter referred to as ``IPCC AR4'' or 
``AR4'') \2\ and to add GWPs for 26 additional fluorinated GHGs that 
are not currently included in the table. The GWPs in Table A-1 are used 
to convert the emissions and supply data for each greenhouse gas into 
carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), 2007. Climate Change 
2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to 
the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on 
Climate Change [Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R.K and Reisinger, A. 
(eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 104 pp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As part of this action, the EPA is finalizing amendments to Table 
A-1 to revise the GWPs of certain GHGs that are already listed in the 
table to incorporate GWPs from the IPCC AR4. The EPA is finalizing 
these changes for two reasons. First, the revisions improve the quality 
of reported emissions and supply by reflecting improved scientific 
understanding of direct and indirect radiative forcing and atmospheric 
lifetimes of certain GHGs. Second, for these GHGs, the revisions ensure 
comparability of data collected in the GHGRP to the Inventory of U.S. 
Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks (hereinafter referred to as 
``Inventory'') that the EPA compiles annually to meet international 
commitments and to GHG inventories prepared by other countries.
    After carefully considering comments received, the EPA is not 
finalizing in this rulemaking the GWPs for the 26 additional 
fluorinated GHGs not included in the IPCC AR4 that we proposed in the 
2013 Revisions proposal. Based on comments that EPA should not include 
compounds that are not included in an IPCC study or peer-reviewed, as 
well as comments on permitting applicability, the EPA is reevaluating 
its approach to assigning GWPs for compounds not included in the IPCC 
AR4 and may address these compounds in a separate future action.

II. Overview of Final Corrections and Other Amendments and Responses to 
Public Comment

    The EPA is finalizing technical corrections, clarifying revisions, 
and other amendments to Part 98 to improve the quality and consistency 
of the data collected by the EPA. Many of the changes proposed were in 
response to feedback received from stakeholders during program 
implementation. Sections II.A through II.AA of this preamble describe 
the more substantive corrections, clarifying, and other amendments that 
we are finalizing for each subpart, including changes that affect the 
applicability of a subpart, changes that affect the applicability of a 
calculation method to a specific source at a facility, changes or 
corrections to calculation methods that substantially revise the 
calculation method or output of the equation, revisions to data 
reporting requirements that substantively clarify the reported data 
element or introduce a new data element, clarifications of general 
monitoring and quality assurance requirements, and changes to add new 
definitions. We have summarized the amendments to each subpart in the 
memorandum, ``Final Table of 2013 Revisions to the Greenhouse Gas 
Reporting Rule'' (hereinafter referred to as the ``Table of 2013 
Revisions'') available in the docket for this rulemaking (EPA-HQ-OAR-
2012-0934). The Table of 2013 Revisions describes each final change 
within a subpart and includes many 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, 
simple corrections to calculation terms or cross-references that do not 
affect the output of calculations, harmonizing changes within a subpart 
(such as changes to terminology), simple editorial and minor error 
corrections, or removal of redundant text). These minor revisions are 
not discussed in this preamble because they do not substantially change 
the applicability, calculation, monitoring, recordkeeping, or reporting 
requirements of Part 98. The Table of 2013 Revisions also provides the 
existing rule text, the finalized changes, and indications of which 
amendments are being finalized as proposed and which amendments differ 
from the changes proposed in the 2013 Revisions proposal.
    The amendments described in this preamble are listed in this 
section by subpart. The amendments to each subpart are followed by a 
summary of the major comments on those amendments and the EPA's 
responses. Minor comments received on the proposed amendments and the 
EPA's responses are available in the docket to this rulemaking (EPA-HQ-
OAR-2011-0934). Some of the comments received on the proposed 
amendments included commenter suggestions of additional revisions to 
Part 98 that were beyond the scope of the proposed rulemaking. These 
additional revisions are identified in Sections II.K, II.N, II.R, and 
II.BB of this preamble. Although we are not including the suggested 
revisions in this final rule, the EPA reserves its discretion to 
consider these comments in any future rulemaking.
    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-
2012-0934.
    Additional rationale for these amendments is available in the 
preamble to the proposed rule (78 FR 19802).

A. Subpart A--General Provisions

1. Summary of Final Amendments to Subpart A--Global Warming Potentials
    In this action, we are revising Table A-1 to subpart A of Part 98 
by updating the GWP values of certain compounds. These changes affect 
facilities and suppliers under Part 98 reporting the following 
greenhouse gases: Methane (CH4), nitrous oxide 
(N2O), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), certain 
hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), certain perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and certain 
other fluorinated greenhouse gases (F-GHGs).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Fluorinated greenhouse gases, as defined in 40 CFR 98.6, 
include sulfur hexafluoride, nitrogen trifluoride, and any 
fluorocarbon except for controlled substances as defined at 40 CFR 
part 82, subpart A and substances with vapor pressures of less than 
1 mm of Hg absolute at 25 degrees C.

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

[[Page 71909]]

    As proposed, we are revising GWPs for GHGs already in Table A-1 to 
reflect more accurate GWPs from the IPCC AR4 to better characterize the 
climate impacts of individual GHGs and to ensure continued consistency 
with other U.S. climate programs, including the Inventory. The 
amendments to the GWPs in Table A-1 that we are finalizing in this 
notice are discussed in Section II.A.1 of this preamble. The EPA's 
response to comments received on the proposed revisions to Table A-1 
are in Section II.A.2 of this preamble. The schedule for implementing 
these amendments is discussed in Section III.A of this preamble. 
Section III.B of this preamble clarifies that the EPA is not requiring 
the revision of reports previously submitted to reflect the revised 
GWPs in Table A-1 or other amendments in this final rulemaking. Prior 
year reports, using original GWPs, will remain publicly available. 
However, the EPA will also publish a version of the CO2e 
emissions and supply estimates for the reporting years 2010, 2011, and 
2012 using the revised GWPs in Table A-1. This will allow the Agency 
and public to view and compare trends in GHG data, beginning with the 
first year of GHGRP reporting, using consistent GWPs and without 
placing any additional burden on reporters.
    As discussed in the preamble to the 2013 Revisions proposal, the 
revisions to the GWPs in Table A-1 will change not only the amount of 
CO2e reported by existing reporters but also change the 
number of reporters subject to Part 98. Some facilities to which the 
rule did not previously apply will now meet the thresholds for 
reporting based on increases in calculated CO2e. The EPA 
received specific comments regarding the expansion of applicability 
that could occur in certain sectors due to the revision of the GWP for 
methane and due to certain sector-specific applicability and reporting 
characteristics. For Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Landfills, commenters 
raised a specific concern related to the applicability for certain 
closed landfills that would become subject to Part 98 due to the 
revised GWP for methane. To address this concern, the EPA is amending 
subpart HH, which covers MSW Landfills, as discussed in Section II.R of 
this preamble.
    The EPA has also updated the impacts analysis to address comments 
received on the proposed rule regarding compliance costs and to 
incorporate data from the 2011 reporting year that became available 
following the publication of the proposed rule. The impacts of the 
final amendments for affected subparts, including the number of new 
reporters for each subpart, are discussed in Section V of this 
preamble.
    Summary of Final Amendments to Global Warming Potentials. For 
compounds that are included in the IPCC AR4, the EPA is adopting the 
AR4 GWPs as proposed. This approach will increase the accuracy of the 
CO2e estimates reported and is in keeping with the Agency's 
intent to have the GHGRP complement data compiled for the annual 
Inventory and other EPA programs. Table 2 of this preamble lists the 
final GWP values for each GHG. As discussed in Section I.D of this 
preamble, the EPA may address compounds that are not included in AR4 in 
a separate action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Each chemical substance has a universal, unique identifier 
maintained in the Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) Registry and 
known as the substance's CAS Number. See http://www.cas.org/content/chemical-substances.

              Table 2--GHGs With Revised GWPs for Table A-1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Global
                  Name                      CAS No.\4\        warming
                                                             potential
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Methane.................................         74-82-8              25
Nitrous oxide...........................      10024-97-2             298
HFC-23..................................         75-46-7          14,800
HFC-32..................................         75-10-5             675
HFC-41..................................        593-53-3              92
HFC-125.................................        354-33-6           3,500
HFC-134.................................        359-35-3           1,100
HFC-134a................................        811-97-2           1,430
HFC-143.................................        430-66-0             353
HFC-143a................................        420-46-2           4,470
HFC-152a................................         75-37-6             124
HFC-227ea...............................        431-89-0           3,220
HFC-236fa...............................        690-39-1           9,810
HFC-245ca...............................        679-86-7             693
HFC-43-10mee............................     138495-42-8           1,640
Sulfur hexafluoride.....................       2551-62-4          22,800
PFC-14 (Perfluoromethane)...............         75-73-0           7,390
PFC-116 (Perfluoroethane)...............         76-16-4          12,200
PFC-218 (Perfluoropropane)..............         76-19-7           8,830
PFC-3-1-10 (Perfluorobutane)............        355-25-9           8,860
Perfluorocyclobutane....................        115-25-3          10,300
PFC-4-1-12 (Perfluoropentane)...........        678-26-2           9,160
PFC-5-1-14 (Perfluorohexane)............        355-42-0           9,300
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are not revising GWPs for the remaining compounds in Table A-1, 
which were promulgated in the original final Part 98 rulemaking. 
Because the remaining F-GHGs in Table A-1 were not addressed by the 
IPCC's Second Assessment Report (SAR) at the time that the original 
Part 98 was finalized, the EPA promulgated GWPs for these compounds 
from the IPCC AR4 in the October 30, 2009 final Part 98. The only 
exception was the GWP for sevoflurane, which was not available in the 
SAR or AR4; the EPA promulgated the GWP for sevoflurane based on a 
peer-reviewed study.
    The EPA received multiple comments on the proposed revisions of the 
GWPs

[[Page 71910]]

in Table A-1. In some cases, commenters disagreed with the need to 
update the GHGRP to match the values used in the Inventory or disagreed 
with the use of AR4 values. For example, we received multiple comments 
requesting that the EPA consider more recently published values, or 
wait until the publication of the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report 
(hereinafter referred to as ``AR5'') to amend the GWPs in Table A-1. As 
discussed in the preamble to the proposed rule, the EPA is adopting AR4 
values for certain compounds currently in Table A-1 to increase the 
accuracy of the CO2e estimates collected under the GHGRP to 
better inform EPA policies. The AR4 GWPs will complement the reporting 
metrics used in other U.S. climate programs, including the Inventory 
that is submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate 
Change (UNFCCC).\5\ The AR4 GWPs will also ensure the compatibility of 
Part 98 with the President's Climate Action Plan and the U.S. 
commitment to GHG emission reductions to the United Nations, both of 
which reiterate President Obama's 2009 pledge that the U.S. would 
reduce its GHG emissions by 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020, which 
both the U.S. and United Nations will assess using AR4 GWPs.\6\ We view 
AR5 values as unlikely to come into use by the UNFCCC or other 
widespread use for several years. For example, the IPCC finalized AR4 
in 2007 but the UNFCCC has adopted these values for parties' Inventory 
submissions just starting in 2015. Therefore, for those compounds in 
Table A-1 for which a GWP is available in the AR4, we are adopting the 
AR4 values as proposed and are not adopting GWPs from AR5. See Section 
II.A.2.a of this preamble for the EPA's response to comments related to 
the adoption of AR4 GWPs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Parties to the UNFCCC, including the U.S., have agreed to 
submit annual reports in 2015 and future years using GWP values from 
the IPCC AR4.
    \6\ The President's Climate Action Plan, Executive Office of the 
President, June 2013, p. 4, http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/image/president27sclimateactionplan.pdf; Jonathan Pershing, 
Clarification of the U.S. Economy-Wide Target, http://unfccc.int/files/bodies/awg-lca/application/pdf/20120517_usa_0940.pdf; and 
UNFCCC GE.11-70204, Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological 
Advice 34th Session, 6-16 June 2011, Compilation of economy-wide 
emission reduction targets to be implemented by Parties included in 
Annex I to the Convention, FCCC/SB/2011/INF.1/Rev.1, pp. 7-8, http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2011/sb/eng/inf01r01.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are not including GWPs from the World Meteorological 
Organization (WMO) Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2010 
(Global Ozone Research and Monitoring Project-Report No. 52, 516 pp., 
Geneva, Switzerland, 2011) in this final rule. In the proposed rule, 
the EPA sought comment on whether GWPs for fluorinated ethers and 
alcohols from the WMO Scientific Assessment should be adopted in Table 
A-1. We did not receive any comments related to the WMO on this 
rulemaking; without any commenter support, we have decided not to adopt 
GWPs from that assessment at this time.
    The subpart W calculations for annual mass of GHG emissions for gas 
pneumatic device venting and natural gas driven pneumatic pump venting 
in CO2e are calculated using a conversion factor that was 
developed using the methane GWP from Table A-1. In addition, subpart W 
total GHG emissions are calculated using an equation that references 
numeric GWPs, instead of directly referencing Table A-1. Because the 
GWP values that inform the methane calculations in these three 
equations reference the previous GWP value, each equation needs to be 
amended separately to account for the change in the numeric GWP value 
for methane in Table A-1. While the EPA proposed that the new GWP apply 
throughout all of Part 98, the EPA did not specifically propose 
amendments to the regulatory text referencing the numeric GWP in these 
three discrete equations. In addition to finalizing the GWP value for 
methane in Table A-1, we are also amending the methane conversion 
factor and methane GWP used in three subpart W equations to ensure the 
correct GWP value for methane in Table A-1 is used in these 
calculations. See Section II.J of this preamble for more information.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses--Global Warming Potentials
a. Summary of Comments and Responses on the Revision of the GHGRP To 
Complement the Inventory and the Use of IPCC AR4 GWPs
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to the revision of the GHGRP to incorporate AR4 GWP values in 
Table A-1 to complement the Inventory. See the comment response 
document in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934 for a complete listing 
of all comments and responses.
    Comment: Four commenters expressed support for the EPA's proposal 
to revise the GHGRP to complement the Inventory. One commenter stated 
that the revision to the GWP of methane will enable the EPA to use the 
subpart W reported data to update the annual Inventory. They noted that 
the subpart W data will improve the accuracy of the Inventory's 
estimated methane emissions for the natural gas sector. Several 
commenters supported adoption of AR4 GWP values, because the IPCC is 
the international leader in assessing climate change and determining a 
scientifically based and standardized list of GHGs and associated GWPs. 
These commenters reiterated that the EPA's commitment to report 
emissions using IPCC methods is well articulated in the preamble to the 
proposed rule, which states that the EPA is proposing revisions to 
Table A-1 ``to ensure continued consistency with the Inventory as the 
Inventory begins to use GWPs from the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report'' 
(77 FR 19807).
    Three commenters disagreed with EPA's proposal to incorporate AR4 
GWP values. These commenters asserted that there is not a strong 
scientific basis for updating the GWPs in Table A-1 to subpart A of 
Part 98 to reflect the values adopted in the AR4. The commenters 
contended that the proposed GWPs are not necessarily improved or more 
technically precise than the values EPA has already adopted. The 
commenters noted that the IPCC AR4 discussed some of the uncertainties 
associated with the AR4 GWPs. They stated that the GWPs adopted by the 
IPCC are derived using certain simplifications that have been the 
subject of criticism and that shortcomings in scientific knowledge make 
objective assessment of GHG impacts difficult.
    Some commenters suggested that the EPA wait to revise Table A-1 
until after IPCC AR5 is released. These commenters contended that 
international reporting data are outdated (for instance, they stated 
that GWPs from the IPPC Second Assessment Report, which was finalized 
in 1995, are required to be used for inventory reporting until 2015, 
when values from AR4, which was finalized in 2007, will be 
substituted), and are concerned that AR5 would not be incorporated into 
inventory reporting until 2020 or later. They asserted that the EPA's 
logic in proposing to replace the GWP values in the SAR with those in 
the AR4 should apply equally to replacing the GWP values from the AR4 
with those in the AR5 when they become available. They stated that U.S. 
national and state regulation must be based on the latest and most 
robust scientific consensus of climate science, including appropriate 
GWPs, and that the advance of U.S. science and regulatory policy should 
not be slowed by a non-identical international emission reporting 
process designed for other purposes.
    Commenters also disputed the EPA's rationale of being bound by 
UNFCCC reporting guidelines to use AR4 GWPs

[[Page 71911]]

starting in 2015 for purposes of annual reports of national GHG 
inventories to the UNFCCC. One commenter stated that not incorporating 
AR5 GWPs is unreasonable and will potentially compromise the integrity 
of the GHGRP and future regulatory efforts based thereon. While the 
commenter acknowledged the benefit in reporting national inventories 
from around the world on a consistent basis, they maintained that the 
published GHGRP data and the national GHG inventory are produced for 
different purposes and need not use the same GWP values. The commenter 
stated that the programs do not cover the same emissions or emission 
sources, noting, for example, that the GHGRP requires reporting of a 
wide variety of pollutants that are not required to be included in the 
national inventories reported to UNFCCC.
    Response: As described in the preamble of the proposed GHG 
Reporting Rule (74 FR 16448, April 10, 2009), the GHGRP is intended to 
provide data to support EPA climate policy and to supplement and 
complement existing U.S. government programs related to climate policy 
and research, including the Inventory submitted to the UNFCCC. The 
GHGRP provides data to develop and inform the Inventory and other U.S. 
federal and state climate programs by advancing the understanding of 
emission processes and monitoring methodologies for particular source 
categories or sectors. For example, GHGRP data published through the 
EPA's Facility Level Information on Green House gases Tool (FLIGHT) may 
be used by state and local entities to better understand the 
contribution of emissions from specific regional industries, or by EPA 
regulatory programs to review emissions from certain facilities within 
an industry to inform policy decisions. The GHGRP also complements the 
Inventory and other U.S. programs by providing data from individual 
facilities and suppliers above certain thresholds. Collected facility, 
unit, and process-level GHG data from the GHGRP supplements national 
statistics and improves the emission estimates presented in the 
Inventory. During the development of Part 98, the EPA generally 
proposed and finalized estimation methodologies and reporting metrics 
that were based on recent scientific data and that were consistent with 
the international reporting standards under the UNFCCC and the 
Inventory.
    The goal of Part 98 is to collect data of sufficient accuracy and 
quality to inform future climate policy development. In this final 
rule, the EPA is adopting the proposed AR4 values in Table A-1 to 
ensure more accurate CO2e emission and supply estimates are 
collected for the GHGRP. As noted in the preamble to the proposed 
amendments (78 FR 19808), the IPCC AR4 GWPs reflect advances in 
scientific knowledge on the radiative efficiencies and atmospheric 
lifetimes of carbon dioxide and certain greenhouse gases, taking into 
account the increase in modeled atmospheric CO2 
concentrations since the SAR was published. The GWP of a given gas is 
dependent on the radiative efficiency of that gas, the lifetime of that 
gas, and any indirect forcing effects of that gas, all relative to the 
same values for carbon dioxide. The IPCC Third Assessment Report (TAR) 
used updated values of these factors to provide more accurate GWPs than 
did the IPCC SAR, and similarly the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) 
was an improvement over the TAR. The TAR stated that GWP updates were 
made for those chemicals ``where significantly different new laboratory 
or radiative transfer results have been published.'' \7\ In addition, 
the TAR notes that the radiative efficiency of several gases, including 
CO2, depend on the background concentration. As the 
background concentration rises, the radiative efficiency of an 
additional increment of that gas decreases. Due to updated background 
concentrations and other updates, the TAR calculated a value for the 
reference CO2 gas that was 13 percent smaller than the 
similar calculation for the SAR; because all GWPs are calculated with 
reference to CO2, this increases other GWPs 
proportionally.\8\ The AR4 calculation for the reference CO2 
gas, taking into account the continued increase in background 
concentration, was 8.7 percent lower than the TAR value.\9\ The AR4 
also relied on a number of publications that used experiments to 
improve the estimates of the radiative efficiencies of a number of the 
fluorinated compounds, with changes of up to 40 percent in those values 
for some compounds.\10\ In addition, improved estimates of the effects 
of methane on stratospheric water vapor, itself a greenhouse gas, led 
to an increase in the factor used to estimate the GWP of methane due to 
that effect of 15 percent rather than 5 percent as in the TAR and 
SAR.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ IPCC TAR WG1 (2001), Houghton, J.T.; Ding, Y.; Griggs, D.J.; 
Noguer, M.; van der Linden, P.J.; Dai, X.; Maskell, K.; and Johnson, 
C.A., ed., Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis, Contribution 
of Working Group I to the Third Assessment Report of the 
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University 
Press, ISBN0-521-80767-0 (pb: 0-521-01495-6), p. 385.
    \8\ IPCC TAR WG1, p. 386.
    \9\ IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), 2007. Climate Change 
2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to 
the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on 
Climate Change [Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R.K and Reisinger, A. 
(eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, p. 211.
    \10\ AR4, p. 211.
    \11\ AR4, p. 214.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As such, each successive assessment provides more accurate GWP 
estimates as experiments and improved computational methods lead to 
more accurate estimates of the radiative efficiencies, atmospheric 
lifetimes, and indirect effects of the various gases. Additionally, the 
more recent assessments reflect more up-to-date background 
concentrations, which are necessary for accurately calculating the 
radiative efficiency of the different gases. The AR4 GWPs for these F-
GHGs are therefore more accurate for comparison of the climate impacts 
of individual GHGs than the values from the IPCC SAR that were 
originally adopted in Table A-1, and are more appropriate for 
supporting the overall goals of the GHGRP. For the reasons stated 
above, we disagree with the commenters that stated there is not a 
strong scientific basis for updating the GWPs in Table A-1 to reflect 
the values in the IPCC AR4.
    In the development of the 2009 final reporting rule, the EPA 
responded to concerns regarding the use of the GWP metric and 
determined that GWP is the most prudent and appropriate approach for 
comparison of the climate impacts of individual greenhouse gases that 
have varying radiative efficiencies and atmospheric lifetimes (see 
Volume 2 of USEPA's Response to Public Comments on the Mandatory 
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: Selection of Reporting Thresholds, 
Greenhouses Gases, and De Minimis Provisions, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2008-0508-2259). The GWP metric inherently reflects the atmospheric 
life-span of GHGs and is an internationally accepted standard 
recognized and utilized by the IPCC, UNFCCC, and Kyoto Protocol.
    As discussed in the preamble to the proposed amendments, one of the 
reasons we proposed AR4 GWPs for the chemicals currently in Table A-1 
was to maintain consistency with the Inventory and similar U.S. 
domestic programs. This is consistent with our approach to date under 
the GHGRP; in the 2009 final reporting rule, the EPA specifically chose 
to use GWPs published in the IPCC Second Assessment Report for GHGs 
included in that report to allow comparisons between the Inventory, 
other U.S. climate programs, and the GHGRP. The EPA has received

[[Page 71912]]

encouragement from stakeholders to continue to use GHG data from the 
GHGRP to complement and support development of the Inventory, such as 
for improvements to emissions estimates from the petroleum and natural 
gas production source categories. Using consistent GWPs allows for more 
efficient review of data collected through the GHGRP and other U.S. 
climate programs and reduces the potential errors that may arise when 
comparing multiple data sets or converting GHG emissions or supply 
based on separate GWPs. It also reduces the burden for reporters and 
agencies to keep track of separate GWPs when submitting information to 
these programs.
    As discussed in the preamble to the proposed amendments, countries 
that submit inventories to the UNFCCC have decided to begin using GWP 
values from the IPCC AR4 for annual inventories submitted in 2015 and 
expected to continue to use the AR4 GWPs for several years thereafter. 
Accordingly, the United States has a policy commitment to begin using 
GWP values from the IPCC AR4 for annual inventories submitted in 2015 
and beyond. Because one of the purposes of the GHGRP is to supplement 
the Inventory, the EPA determined that it is most appropriate to adopt 
the AR4 GWPs for the compounds currently in Table A-1 for the annual 
GHGRP reports submitted in 2014, in order to meet the needs of the 
Inventory timeframe. As noted in Section II.A.1 of this preamble, use 
of the AR4 GWPs will also ensure compatibility of the GHGRP with the 
President's Climate Action Plan and the U.S. commitment to GHG emission 
reductions to the United Nations.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The President's Climate Action Plan, Executive Office of 
the President, June 2013, p. 4, http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/image/president27sclimateactionplan.pdf; Jonathan 
Pershing, Clarification of the U.S. Economy-Wide Target, http://unfccc.int/files/bodies/awg-lca/application/pdf/20120517_usa_0940.pdf; and UNFCCC GE.11-70204, Subsidiary Body for Scientific and 
Technological Advice 34th Session, 6-16 June 2011, Compilation of 
economy-wide emission reduction targets to be implemented by Parties 
included in Annex I to the Convention, FCCC/SB/2011/INF.1/Rev.1, pp. 
7-8, http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2011/sb/eng/inf01r01.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA agrees with commenters that using the latest and most 
robust GWPs from the IPCC AR5 for the compounds currently in Table A-1, 
once AR5 is published, could lead to more accurate assessments of 
climate impacts in the future. We considered waiting until publication 
of AR5 values and adopting those values for Table A-1, as suggested by 
commenters. We balanced the benefits of adopting more recent GWPs to 
better characterize national GHG emissions and inform EPA policies with 
the benefit of retaining consistency across national and international 
programs, particularly the Inventory, for compounds that are included 
in AR4, and we believe that a potential gain in accuracy does not 
justify the loss of consistency with UNFCCC reporting (and associated 
policy analysis) that would result.\13\ Specifically, we considered 
that even though we anticipate that the AR5 GWPs will be published in 
coming months, the AR5 assessment has not been yet adopted by the 
UNFCCC or other national or international programs and is not likely to 
be in the near future.\14\ Wholesale adoption of AR5 GWPs by the GHGRP 
while other EPA and international programs are using AR4 GWPs likely 
would cause stakeholder confusion, create an ongoing need to explain 
the distinction in GWPs in subsequent actions, and complicate decision-
making.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ While the AR5 GWPs have not been publicly available during 
the development of this rule, the GWPs published in a recent article 
are likely to be the basis of updated GWPs in AR5. See Hodnebrog, 
[Oslash]., M. Etminan, J. S. Fuglestvedt, G. Marston, G. Myhre, C. 
J. Nielsen, K. P. Shine, and T. J. Wallington, ``Global Warming 
Potentials and Radiative Efficiencies of Halocarbons and Related 
Compounds: A Comprehensive Review,'' Reviews of Geophysics, Accepted 
manuscript online: 24 APR 2013.
    \14\ AR4 was published in 2007 and is being adopted for 
Inventory reporting starting in 2015. ``Revision of the UNFCCC 
reporting guidelines on annual inventories for Parties included in 
Annex I to the Convention,'' FCCC/CP/2011/9/Add.2, Decision 6/CP 17, 
15 March 2012, available at http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2011/cop17/eng/09a02.pdf#page=23. AR5 is anticipated to be published in 
late 2013; adoption of AR5 for Inventory reporting is likely to be 
on a similar timeframe, if at all.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The adoption of AR4 GWPs for those compounds currently in Table A-1 
will improve the GHGRP, and by extension, EPA climate policies, by 
incorporating more scientifically accurate GWPs than the SAR values 
originally adopted in Table A-1. This approach also ensures that the 
GHGRP uses widely relied on, published, peer-reviewed GWP data. As 
discussed in the next comment and response, the EPA may consider 
adoption of AR5 GWPs or other GWP values for compounds currently listed 
in Table A-1 if these values are adopted by the UNFCCC and the global 
community.
    Comment: Several commenters were concerned about the frequency with 
which the EPA intends to update Table A-1 in the future. One commenter 
contended that the EPA's proposed GWP revisions will not achieve 
consistency with the Inventory because it would create confusion across 
reporting years. The commenter stated that industry should not have to 
adjust data collection and reporting protocols due to revised GWPs 
after only three years of reporting. Commenters were concerned that 
frequent future revisions to GWPs would place unnecessary burdens on 
reporters and would affect other regulatory programs that rely on the 
Part 98 GWPs, such as the title V and Prevention of Significant 
Deterioration (PSD) permitting programs under the EPA's Tailoring Rule 
(75 FR 31532, June 3, 2010). Two additional commenters expressed 
concern that future revisions to the GWP values by the IPCC would drive 
further rule revisions by the EPA. The commenters stated that if the 
EPA's desire is to ensure consistency between the Inventory and GHGRP, 
future changes to the GWP values seem inevitable. They stated that 
these changes, if adopted, may require sources to constantly change 
their data gathering and evaluation protocols for reporting and require 
sources to continually revise (or have the EPA revise) their prior year 
submissions.
    Response: At the time that Part 98 was proposed, it was the EPA's 
intent to require reporting of emissions of individual gases as well as 
emissions in CO2e. We explained that because GHGs have 
different heat trapping capacities, they are not directly comparable 
without translating them into common units (74 FR 16453, April 10, 
2009). We intended at that time to allow for future updates of the GWPs 
in Table A-1 to reflect advances in the scientific research on the heat 
trapping capacities of individual gases. For example, in the proposed 
2009 GHG Reporting Rule, the EPA explained the collection of individual 
gas emissions and conversion of emissions to CO2e and noted 
that ``reporting the quantity and type of gas emitted allows for future 
recalculation of CO2e emissions in the event that GWP 
factors change'' (74 FR 16448, April 10, 2009).
    As discussed in this section of this preamble, we have determined 
that it is appropriate to update certain GWP values already in Table A-
1 to the IPCC AR4 values, adopted by the UNFCCC for national inventory 
reporting beginning in 2015, at this time. However, as stated in the 
preamble to the 2013 Revisions proposal, the EPA does not intend to 
revise the GWPs in Table A-1 each time new data are published in the 
scientific literature. Instead, we intend to update GWPs periodically 
in the future as the UNFCCC reporting guidelines change (i.e., when the 
UNFCCC adopts values from a future IPCC assessment for

[[Page 71913]]

compounds that are currently listed in AR4) and possibly as updated 
GWPs for new compounds are published in IPCC or WMO assessments or in 
other peer-reviewed literature. We note that there are generally 
significant lag times in adoption of new values by the UNFCCC. In the 
past, the parties to the UNFCCC have only infrequently updated the GWPs 
that countries use to report their GHG emissions (i.e., less than once 
every 10 years). Significant time may pass between publication of peer-
reviewed GWPs, their adoption into IPCC scientific assessments of GWPs, 
and their subsequent adoption into the UNFCCC reporting guidelines. 
With these considerations, we will continue to weigh the benefits of 
updating the GHGRP GWPs to more current values against the benefits of 
maintaining the values used by the international reporting community 
and the values used in other U.S. climate programs, such as the joint 
EPA and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) Light-
Duty Vehicle GHG Emission Standards. The latter benefits include 
minimizing confusion and policy uncertainty. However, we consider 
periodic updates to Table A-1 to be necessary to ensure that the GHGRP 
incorporates scientific advances in climate science to best inform EPA 
policies and programs, such as regulatory options and voluntary 
reduction partnerships, and to provide accurate information to other 
stakeholders. We also acknowledge that although the GHGRP may collect 
and publish data using the AR4 GWPs or GWPs published in other peer-
reviewed literature, the EPA and other policymakers may analyze the 
data collected using other GWPs as desired. For example, we received 
comments that the EPA should finalize the GWP values from IPCC AR5 when 
they are released (discussed above in this section of the preamble); 
while we are instead finalizing the GWP values from AR4, the GHGRP data 
is presented in a manner that stakeholders can calculate CO2 
other GWPS as desired.
    The EPA recognizes that for some subparts, adoption of higher GWPs 
for certain compounds in Table A-1 (e.g., methane) could potentially 
place some facilities above the reporting threshold for Part 98 and 
increase the number of facilities that are affected by other EPA or 
state programs that have thresholds that rely on the GWPs in Table A-1 
(e.g., EPA's Tailoring Rule) (see Section II.A.2.c and Section V of 
this preamble).We acknowledge that frequent adoption of new GWP values 
could also disrupt the continuity of data across a time-series, making 
it more difficult for regulatory agencies and stakeholders to analyze 
and compare previously reported data. The EPA is addressing that 
concern for these final amendments by publishing a consistent time 
series with the revised GWPs while maintaining the certified emission 
reports; see Section III.B of this preamble for more information. With 
these considerations, the Agency intends to balance the need to update 
Table A-1 to incorporate scientific advancements with the impact on the 
number of reporters subject to Part 98, the accuracy of reported 
emissions, and the impacts to other regulatory programs.
b. Summary of Comments and Responses on the Use of 100-Year GWPs
    Comment: One commenter agreed that the 100-year GWPs should be 
updated, but objected to the value the EPA proposed for methane, 
stating that the GWP of 25 (from the IPCC AR4) is out of date. The 
commenter stated that subsequent to the completion of AR4, the National 
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) published an article in 
Science (Shindell, 2009) \15\ further updating the value for methane's 
100-year GWP to incorporate net direct and indirect radiative forcing 
impacts from aerosols, which the prior AR4 estimates did not 
contemplate. This commenter contended that the EPA should adopt NASA's 
GWP of 33 for methane on a 100-year time horizon. Otherwise, the 
commenter maintained, known net impacts from aerosols will be ignored 
in the reported (calculated) emissions values, and decision-makers will 
not be informed of the correct impact of sources of methane emissions 
when developing climate action plans. The commenter stated that if the 
EPA does not use NASA's GWP value, then the agency should wait until 
the release of the IPCC AR5 and use that report's GWP for methane.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Shindell, D. T., Faluvegi, G., Koch, D. M., Schmidt, G. A., 
Unger, N., & Bauer, S. E. (2009). Improved attribution of climate 
forcing to emissions. Science, 326(5953), 716-718.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Several commenters requested that the EPA reconsider our prior 
decision to adopt only a 100-year GWP for methane. While many 
commenters supported the EPA's use of 100-year GWPs in the rule, we 
received a number of generalized messages requesting that we use 20-
year GWP values in addition to the 100-year values. These commenters 
believe the use of the 20-year GWPs in the GHGRP would have important 
policy implications, because the exclusive use of a 100-year GWP 
implies that the only period of concern for climate change is 100 
years. The EPA received five unique comment letters recommending that 
facility and supplier CO2e emissions data be calculated 
using both the 100-year GWP and 20-year GWP. One commenter added that 
facilities emitting 25,000 tons CO2e per year (calculated 
using either a 100-year or 20-year GWP) should be required to report 
under Part 98. Another commenter requested that the EPA use only the 
20-year values, instead of the 100-year values.
    Several commenters referenced a variety of articles, studies, and 
conference proceedings supporting the idea that the reduction of 
methane is critical to slow down the rate of global warming and to 
reduce future peak temperatures. They believe the 100-year GWP the EPA 
uses de-emphasizes the importance and potential benefits of reducing 
the emissions of methane.
    Two commenters disagreed with the EPA's rationale for requiring 
reporting based solely on 100-year GWP values, which is to maintain 
consistency with the UNFCCC's agreement to report national inventories 
for international purposes based on the 100-year GWP. Another commenter 
argued the GHGRP is intended to inform regulation of GHGs under the 
CAA. This commenter notes the IPCC has stated, ``if the policy emphasis 
is to help guard against the possible occurrence of potentially abrupt, 
non-linear climate responses in the relatively near future, then a 
choice of a 20-year time horizon would yield an index that is relevant 
to making such decisions regarding appropriate greenhouse gas abatement 
strategies.'' \16\ Other commenters supported the EPA's adoption of the 
AR4 GWP for methane of 25, which is based on the 100-year time horizon.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ IPCC, Climate Change 1994: Radiative Forcing of Climate 
Change and an Evaluation of the IPCC IS92 Emission Scenarios 229. 
(John T. Houghton et al., ed., Cambridge University Press 1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Response: As noted in the ``Response to Comments on Final Rule, 
Volume 3: General Monitoring Approach, the Need for Detailed Reporting, 
and Other General Rationale Comments'' (see Docket Id. No EPA-HQ-OAR-
2008-0508-2260), the EPA selected the 100-year GWPs because these 
values are the internationally accepted standard for reporting GHG 
emissions. For example, the parties to the UNFCCC agreed to use GWPs 
that are based on a 100-year time period for preparing national 
inventories, and the reports submitted by other signatories to the 
UNFCCC use GWPs based on a 100-year time period, including the GWP for 
methane and certain GHGs identified as short-lived

[[Page 71914]]

climate pollutants. These values were subsequently adopted and used in 
multiple EPA climate initiatives, including the EPA's SNAP program and 
the Inventory, as well as EPA voluntary reduction partnerships (e.g., 
Natural Gas STAR). The EPA noted at the time that Part 98 was finalized 
that alternative metrics for comparing the potential climate impacts of 
different GHGs were being considered by the IPCC. However, the IPCC has 
not made a recommendation regarding adoption of the 20-year metric. 
Furthermore, although the UNFCCC has updated the international 
reporting guidelines to reference GWPs from AR4 for the year 2015 and 
beyond, the guidelines continue to specify GWPs with a 100-year time 
horizon. We have reviewed the NASA Science publication (Shindell et 
al., 2009) \17\ referenced by the commenter that provides a 100-year 
GWP for methane of 33. However, as discussed above, the EPA has decided 
to adopt AR4 values across the board because it is beneficial for both 
regulatory agencies and industry to use the same GWP values for these 
GHG compounds because it allows for more efficient review of data 
collected through the GHGRP and other U.S. climate programs, reduces 
potential errors that may arise when comparing multiple data sets or 
converting GHG emissions or supply based on separate GWPs, and reduces 
the burden for reporters and agencies to keep track of separate GWPs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Shindell, D. T., Faluvegi, G., Koch, D. M., Schmidt, G. A., 
Unger, N., & Bauer, S. E. (2009). Improved attribution of climate 
forcing to emissions. Science, 326(5953), 716-718.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding the use of 20-year GWPs, human-influenced climate change 
occurs on both short (decadal) and long (millennial) timescales. While 
there is no single best way to value both short and long-term impacts 
in a single metric, the 100-year GWP is a reasonable approach that has 
been widely accepted by the international community. If the EPA were to 
adopt a 20-year GWP solely for methane, or for certain other compounds, 
it would introduce a metric that is inconsistent with both the GWPs 
used for the remaining Table A-1 gases and with the reporting 
guidelines issued by the UNFCCC and used by the Inventory and other EPA 
programs. Additionally, the EPA and other federal agencies, calculating 
the impact of short-lived climate forcers using 100-year GWPs, are 
making reduction of short-lived climate forcers a priority.\18\ For the 
reasons described above, the EPA is retaining a 100-year time horizon 
as the standard metric for defining GWPs in the GHGRP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ E.g., U.S. Leadership on the Global Methane Initiative 
(http://www.epa.gov/globalmethane/) and Climate and Clean Air 
Coalition to Reduce Short-Lived Climate Pollutants (http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2012/02/184055.htm).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Summary of Comments and Responses on the Relationship of the Final 
Rule to Other EPA Programs (e.g., Tailoring Rule Programs) or State 
Programs
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to the relationship between the final rule and other EPA 
programs. See the comment response document in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2012-0934 for a complete listing of all comments and responses 
related to this topic.
    Comment: Several commenters noted that changes to the GWPs in Table 
A-1 and any changes to the gases listed in Table A-1 create 
discontinuities in the assessment of emissions under permitting rules, 
which can create shifts in permitting requirements. In the case of 
title V permitting, commenters stated that facilities that become 
subject to title V as the result of revisions to Table A-1 should be 
allowed at least one year from the publication date of the revisions to 
assess the impact of the changes, submit a title V application, or 
apply for a synthetic minor limit to avoid title V. Commenters further 
stated that if a source has taken a synthetic minor limit on its 
CO2e emissions to remain below the title V applicability 
threshold and is unable to meet the synthetic minor limit due to the 
revisions to the GWPs, then facilities should have a one year period to 
assess emissions, determine if the synthetic minor permit is no longer 
viable, and apply for the appropriate permit. Commenters stressed that 
there should be no penalty for non-compliance with the synthetic minor 
limit or title V permitting requirement. Commenters expressed similar 
concerns regarding new construction and modifications becoming subject 
to PSD requirements due to revisions to GWP values.
    Some commenters argued revisions to the GWP values impact 
compliance with existing CO2e permit limits for PSD 
avoidance, Best Available Control Technology (BACT), and plant-wide 
applicability limits (PAL). They also requested sources be allowed to 
continue using the old GWP values for a period of one year, so that 
affected facilities may seek revisions to their permits, 
redeterminations, or recalculation of these limits, as applicable. The 
commenters recommended a provision designed to allow facilities time to 
incrementally adjust to changes in the current rules be made available 
if a change in the GWPs presents a problem for meeting a PAL that 
cannot be resolved.
    One commenter asserted that while section 114 of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 
7414, is cited as the basis for the proposed rule, section 114 does not 
empower the EPA to change the thresholds for major source 
determinations under other programs, such as the Prevention of 
Significant Deterioration (PSD) and title V permitting programs. The 
commenter explained that section 114 governs recordkeeping and 
inspections, and that it allows the EPA to require sources to provide 
data about air emissions. The commenter stated that the amendments to 
the GWP values affect the major source and permitting thresholds and 
therefore, any changes to Table A-1 must be proposed and finalized 
under the EPA's authority to implement the relevant permitting program. 
Specifically, the commenter asserted that amendments to the PSD program 
must be made pursuant to CAA sections 160-169, the Indian Country minor 
source rule must be amended pursuant to CAA sections 171-179B, and the 
title V program must be amended pursuant to CAA sections 501-507. The 
commenter stated that revisions to Table A-1 should be evaluated and 
processed by EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) 
because OAQPS published the Tailoring Rule and traditionally handles 
substantive permitting regulations. Several commenters requested the 
EPA provide clear guidance in the final rule addressing how PSD and 
title V issues resulting from GWP revisions should be handled.
    Response: As the EPA noted in the preamble to the Tailoring Rule 
(75 FR 31514, June 3, 2010), the Tailoring Rule codifies Table A-1 to 
Subpart A of 40 CFR part 98 for the purpose of calculating emissions of 
CO2e for determining Prevention of Significant Deterioration 
(PSD) and title V applicability for GHG (75 FR 31522). This approach 
was adopted in lieu of codifying IPCC values, which may change more 
frequently over time, and to provide certainty as to which GWP values 
need to be used. We explained, ``[a]ny changes to Table A-1 of the 
mandatory GHG reporting rule regulatory text must go through an 
appropriate regulatory process. In this manner, the values used for the 
permitting programs will reflect the latest values adopted for usage by 
the EPA after a regulatory process and will be consistent with those 
values used in

[[Page 71915]]

the EPA's mandatory GHG reporting rule'' (75 FR 31532). Furthermore, 
this Part 98 notice-and-comment process ``will ensure advance notice of 
such a change'' for sources that may be subject to the Tailoring Rule. 
See U.S. EPA, ``Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V GHG 
Tailoring Rule: EPA's Response to Public Comments,'' May 2010 (Docket 
Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0517-19181), p. 101, n.5. Thus, as the EPA 
noted in the proposal to these Part 98 revisions, because permitting 
applicability is based partly on CO2e emissions, an 
amendment to Table A-1 may affect program applicability for a source.
    The EPA disagrees with the commenter who asserted that the EPA is 
changing the thresholds for major source determinations under the PSD 
and title V permitting programs in this rule. The Tailoring Rule 
references GWP values from Part 98 Table A-1 and uses them to calculate 
CO2e emissions values, so the GWP changes in this final rule 
may affect the calculation of GHG emissions for individual sources 
relative to those thresholds. However, this final rule does not modify 
the major source thresholds of the PSD and title V permitting programs 
or any other EPA program, nor does it modify the ``subject to 
regulation'' thresholds for GHG established under the Tailoring Rule.
    The EPA acknowledges that amendments to Table A-1 may result in an 
existing facility becoming subject to title V permitting. A stationary 
source may be a major source subject to title V permitting requirements 
solely on the basis of its GHG emissions, provided the source's 
emissions exceed the thresholds established in the Tailoring Rule. GHG 
emission sources that emit or have the potential to emit (PTE) at least 
100,000 (tons per year) TPY CO2e (calculated using GWPs), 
and also emit or have the PTE 100 TPY of GHGs on a mass basis 
(calculated without GWPs) are required to obtain a title V permit if 
they do not already have one.
    While the EPA does not believe that many sources will change their 
title V applicability status as a result of this Table A-1 revision, it 
is conceivable that an existing source with a PTE just beneath the 
title V thresholds on a CO2e basis may find that the revised 
GWP values result in a PTE calculation that makes the source a ``major 
source'' under title V. This determination would depend on what GHG 
compound(s) the source emits, the amount of the compound emitted, and 
if the GWP of the compound is increasing or decreasing. For example, a 
hypothetical source that emits only methane and no other GHG compounds 
or other regulated NSR pollutants has a PTE of 90,000 TPY 
CO2e in 2012 and is therefore not a title V major source. 
However, in 2014, once the new GWPs are effective for this hypothetical 
source, it could have emissions that make it a major source of GHG 
under title V, because its mass emissions are at least 100 TPY and its 
calculated PTE would be approximately 107,000 TPY CO2e as a 
result of methane's GWP increasing from 21 to 25 (assuming the source 
does not take a restriction on its methane emissions).
    A source applying for a title V permit for the first time must 
submit its permit application within 12 months after the source 
``becomes subject to the [operating] permit program'' or such earlier 
time that the permitting authority may require (see 40 CFR 70.5(a)(1)). 
As the EPA noted in the title V Narrowing Rule,\19\ a source ``becomes 
subject to'' title V permitting when there is an EPA-promulgated or 
approved permit program ``applicable to the source.'' See 75 FR 82259, 
n. 8; CAA section 503(a). Thus, the exact date that the new GWPs will 
become effective for purposes of title V applicability may vary, 
depending on the status of the applicable title V program as it relates 
to GHG sources and on how the GWPs are incorporated into the applicable 
title V permit program. For example, the federal part 71 permit program 
will begin using the revised GWPs upon the effective date of this rule, 
and some states may similarly have title V programs that automatically 
update the GWP values. However, other states may have approved title V 
programs that require revision to use the revised GWP values for title 
V permitting, or may even still lack authority to permit major sources 
of GHG under title V. In the example above, the hypothetical source of 
methane whose PTE calculation increased to 107,000 TPY CO2e 
would have up to a year from becoming subject to title V permitting 
under the applicable title V program to submit an application for a 
title V operating permit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Action To Ensure Authority To Implement Title V Permitting 
Programs Under the Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule (75 FR 82254, Dec. 
30, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A source may be able to avoid the requirement to have a title V 
permit if it has been issued a synthetic minor source permit that 
limits its PTE below the major source thresholds (including the 
CO2e-based ``subject to regulation'' threshold) for title V 
applicability.\20\ It may be advisable for the terms of the synthetic 
minor permit to impose limits on GHGs on a mass basis, rather than a 
CO2e basis (even where the purpose of the permit is to limit 
a source's PTE below 100,000 CO2e). For such mass-based 
limits, a change in the GWP of the pollutant does not render the source 
out of compliance with the synthetic minor source limit, although the 
source may need to obtain a revised synthetic minor source limit to 
maintain its synthetic minor source status and avoid the need for a 
title V permit as a major source (i.e., if the change in GWPs makes the 
source a title V major source under the conditions of the original 
minor source permit).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ In general, a source has up to one year to either apply for 
a title V permit, or be issued a synthetic minor permit to avoid 
title V applicability (but merely applying for a synthetic minor 
permit within 12 months is not sufficient to avoid title V 
applicability).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA recognizes that there also may be synthetic minor source 
permit limits that are established solely in terms of CO2e. 
This may occur at a source that emits multiple GHG compounds and seeks 
flexibility in managing its GHG emissions. In such cases, the source 
should analyze any permit and regulatory provisions governing the 
calculation of CO2e for purposes of compliance with the 
permit. Even where the calculation of CO2e under those 
provisions would change for a source, the EPA believes most sources 
will still be able to comply with its synthetic minor source permit 
because there is no GWP change for CO2 and the change in GWP 
for the other GHG compounds is generally small. Thus, we do not expect 
the GWP revisions to significantly alter CO2e emissions for 
most types of sources, particularly sources in which most of their GHG 
emissions result from fuel combustion. However, where a source 
anticipates difficulty in compliance with its synthetic minor source 
limit, it should work with its permitting authority to revise its 
permit to ensure compliance with the requirements of the permit and of 
title V.
    The EPA also acknowledges that this action will affect the 
applicability of the PSD permit program for the proposed construction 
of new sources and proposed modifications of existing sources. As of 
the effective date of the Part 98 rule revisions, proposed sources and 
proposed modifications, including proposed PALs and PAL renewals, will 
need to calculate their GHG PTE and determine PSD applicability based 
on the revised GWPs. However, PSD permitting obligations should not be 
affected for a source or modification that has either already obtained 
a PSD permit or begun actual construction at a time when it was 
legitimately

[[Page 71916]]

considered a source that did not require a PSD permit (See 75 FR 51593-
94, August 20, 2010). This approach is consistent with our PSD 
permitting regulations that provide: ``[n]o new major stationary source 
or major modification to which the requirements of paragraphs (j) 
through (r)(5) of this section apply shall begin actual construction 
without a permit that states the major stationary source or major 
modification will meet those requirements'' 40 CFR 51.166(a)(7)(iii); 
40 CFR 52.21(a)(2)(iii). We do not interpret these provisions to 
prevent a source or modification from continuing construction when that 
source or modification has been legitimately determined not to trigger 
PSD permitting obligations and has begun actual construction before the 
effective date of the Part 98 regulations. Similarly, we do not 
interpret these provisions to prevent a source with a PSD permit issued 
before the Part 98 regulations become effective from beginning or 
continuing construction under that permit, as long as that permit has 
not expired.
    Likewise, the GWP revisions should not affect past permitting 
actions for a source that has obtained a final PSD permit before these 
revisions to Part 98 become effective, regardless of whether or not 
that PSD permit included GHG limits. The EPA generally does not require 
reopening or revision of PSD permits that are issued prior to the 
effective date of a new requirement. See 75 FR 31593; Memorandum from 
John S. Seitz, Director OAQPS, New Source Review (NSR) Program 
Transitional Guidance, page 6 (March 11, 1991). Consistent with this 
approach, PSD permits based on earlier GWPs that are issued in final 
form prior to the effective date of these Part 98 rule revisions would 
not have to be revised or reopened solely due to the promulgation and 
effectiveness of these Part 98 rule revisions. Furthermore, compliance 
with final PSD permits that include BACT limits based on 
CO2e, PALs based on CO2e, and with other permit 
conditions that utilize GWPs from Table A-1 may be determined based on 
the GWPs that were in effect at the time of permit issuance (even if 
the permit does not specify the applicable GWP value).
    While adoption of the Part 98 revisions will automatically apply in 
some PSD permit programs, other programs will have to engage in a state 
implementation plan (SIP) adoption process. Specifically, these new GWP 
values will apply immediately upon the effective date of this rule for 
PSD programs administered by EPA Regions and for those administered by 
``delegated'' states that rely upon 40 CFR 52.21, as well as in any 
state with a SIP that automatically updates when either 40 CFR sections 
51.166 or 52.21 are revised (e.g., the state regulations incorporate by 
reference 40 CFR 52.21 without specifying an ``as of'' date of 
incorporation). However, some states will need to adopt the changes to 
the GWPs into their SIP before they become effective in their state 
permitting programs. This provides additional transitional time for 
sources in those states to comply with the required changes before the 
GWPs become effective in those states.
    Likewise, as noted above, revisions to the GWPs will occur 
automatically for federal title V permitting. Some states may also have 
title V permit programs that automatically update, while other states 
may require revisions to their approved title V permit programs before 
the GWP revisions become effective for purposes of title V permitting.
    Given the transitional times discussed above, we anticipate that 
most facilities will have a period to incrementally adjust to the 
changes in this final rule. Because development of the 2015 Inventory 
will rely in part on data from the GHGRP reports submitted in 2014, it 
is prudent for existing GHGRP reporters to calculate facility GHG 
emissions or supply using the revised GWPs in Table A-1 for their 
reporting year 2013 annual reports. Accordingly, the EPA is finalizing 
the schedule for the final amendments to Part 98 as proposed, and is 
not finalizing a transitional period. See Section III.A of this 
preamble for additional information.
    Regarding the requests for the EPA to provide guidance, as we noted 
in the Response to Public Comments on the Tailoring Rule,''[i]n the 
event that we propose a change to GWP values, we will work with 
permitting authorities as necessary to provide guidance to sources on 
transitional issues'' Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0517-19181, p. 101 
(footnote). A number of EPA offices, including OAQPS, have worked 
collaboratively in developing this response. Thus, in addition to the 
guidance provided in this preamble regarding the application of the 
Table A-1 revision to state PSD and title V programs and to previously-
issued preconstruction permits, the EPA will continue to work with 
permitting authorities to address implementation concerns, as needed.
    Comment: Several commenters expressed concern that the proposed 
rule appeared to propose retroactively applying amended GWPs to prior 
year reports. The commenters also stated that the EPA did not provide a 
regulatory analysis of how retroactively applying GWPs would affect PSD 
or title V permitting obligations. Five commenters expressed concern 
that the proposed revisions to Table A-1 could result in enforcement 
actions associated with previous determinations under these regulatory 
programs. These commenters expressed concern that such a change would 
stall current permit projects and possibly reopen existing permits that 
were previously approved. In particular, some commenters were concerned 
about the impact on landfills, which require permits to install 
combustion devices for compliance under New Source Performance 
Standards (NSPS) and for landfill gas renewable energy projects. They 
recommended that the EPA clarify that any changes to the GWPs and GHG 
reporting requirements would not be applied retroactively to prior 
determinations made under PSD, title V, or any other regulatory 
programs that rely on the GWP values in Table A-1.
    Response: The EPA did not intend to suggest in the proposed rule 
that the revised GWPs in Table A-1 would be retroactively applied under 
the PSD and title V permitting programs or for any other regulatory 
purpose. Thus, as explained above, PSD permits based on earlier GWPs 
that are issued in final form (to landfills or to other types of 
sources) prior to the effective date of these Part 98 rule revisions 
would not have to be revised or reopened solely due to the promulgation 
and effectiveness of these Part 98 rule revisions. Moreover, as to the 
commenter's concern regarding the impact on landfills, we note that, 
generally because reductions in methane will be credited more highly in 
PSD applicability determinations, we would expect these project to be 
less, rather than more, likely to trigger PSD were the revised Table A-
1 values to apply.
    As discussed above, we do not see any cause to deviate from our 
historical practice of not requiring PSD permits to be reopened or 
amended to incorporate requirements that take effect after the permit 
is issued. With these considerations, the EPA does not expect the 
revised GWPs to be applied retroactively to prior PSD and title V 
permitting determinations made based on prior years' GHG emissions, 
though these revisions will apply to permitting determinations made 
after the effective date of these Part 98 rule revisions, as described 
above. As such, we do not expect that facilities will be subject to the 
reopening of a previously approved PSD or title V permit solely based 
on

[[Page 71917]]

application of the amended GWPs in Table A-1 to prior years' emissions.
    For example, assume that a new major stationary source gets a PSD 
permit in 2011, undergoing a BACT analysis for GHGs. The permit that 
establishes the source's CO2e emission limit(s) are based on 
the Table A-1 values that are in place at the time of permit issuance 
(i.e., from the 2009 GHG reporting rule). In 2014, after the effective 
date of the 2013 Table A-1 revisions, the source would continue to 
determine compliance with their PSD permit by the original permit 
conditions that based applicability and BACT limits on the GWP values 
in the 2009 GHG reporting rule. Then, in 2015, the company submits a 
PSD permit application to undergo a modification at the source. In 
order to determine PSD applicability for the project, the applicant and 
permitting authority should use the most updated values of GWPs that 
are in effect, which at this point would be the GWP values in the 2013 
Table A-1 revisions. Assuming that this source is in a state that 
automatically updates its SIP when the federal rules are amended, it 
would determine its emissions increase from the 2015 proposed 
modification (e.g., ``baseline actual emissions'' and ``projected 
actual emissions'') by using the GWP values in the 2013 Table A-1 
revisions.
    Comment: Several commenters expressed concerns with how state and 
regional programs that rely on the GWP values in Part 98 may be 
affected by the EPA's revisions to Table A-1. One commenter was 
particularly concerned about the potential of increased complexity in 
comparing emissions between programs and between reporting years. For 
example, the commenter notes that some states have incorporated the GWP 
values in Part 98 into their state reporting programs to reduce the 
reporting burden. The commenter explained that these states will either 
have to propose and approve rule changes to update their GWP values to 
match those in Part 98 or certain facilities will be required to report 
two sets of CO2e data: One to the EPA and one to the state 
or local program. The commenter recommends that, in order to ensure 
consistent reporting across federal, state and regional reporting 
programs, the agency must ensure that the reporting revisions currently 
and in the future are well-coordinated with state and local reporting 
programs.
    Response: As noted in the preamble to the final 2009 Part 98 (74 FR 
56260), the EPA has intended to periodically update Table A-1 when GWP 
values are evaluated or re-evaluated by the scientific community. The 
revised GWP values in Table A-1 will likely result in changes to the 
CO2e estimates of GHGs emitted or supplied. As noted by the 
commenters, the revisions may affect the state and regional programs 
that rely on the GWP values in Table A-1.The EPA recognizes the 
importance of state and local GHG programs in evaluating regional GHG 
emissions and in implementing GHG reduction strategies. In reviewing 
Table A-1, the EPA considered the benefits of having consistent GWPs 
across federal, state, and regional programs. In particular, we 
recognize that using consistent GWPs across these programs increases 
the ease with which agencies can analyze local emissions in light of 
national estimates. As discussed in Section II.A.2.a of this preamble, 
the EPA balanced the benefits of updating the GHGRP GWPs to more 
current values with the U.S. commitment to maintain consistency with 
values used by the UNFCCC and the values used in other U.S. climate 
programs. The EPA's primary goal in updating Table A-1 is to ensure 
that the GHGRP incorporates scientific advances in climate science to 
better inform EPA policies and programs. As noted previously, we 
recognize that frequent updates to Table A-1 may cause confusion or 
create difficulties with reviewing prior year data based on different 
GWP values. Because of these concerns, we do not intend to update Table 
A-1 frequently (see Section II.A.2.a of this preamble for additional 
information). Although the EPA anticipates making periodic updates that 
increase the accuracy of the GHGRP, we anticipate balancing the 
frequency of these changes with the impacts to federal, state, and 
local programs.
    We note that the applicability, compliance schedule, calculation 
methodologies, or any other requirements established under these non-
Part 98 programs are outside the scope of these amendments. Concerns 
related to implementation and compliance with other state and regional 
programs that rely on Table A-1 cannot be addressed through Part 98. 
However, the EPA intends to work with state and regional programs to 
address implementation concerns. As noted in the response above, it is 
likely that some PSD SIPs will need to be revised as a result of this 
action, since some state rules do not automatically update when Part 98 
is updated.
3. Summary of Other Corrections and Final Amendments to Subpart A
    In addition to the amendments to global warming potentials in Table 
A-1, we are also finalizing corrections and other clarifications to 
certain provisions of subpart A of Part 98. The more substantive 
corrections, clarifying, and other amendments to subpart A are found 
here. We are finalizing all of the minor corrections to subpart A 
presented in the Table of 2013 Revisions as proposed (see Docket Id. 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934).
    The EPA has finalized, with revisions, the amendment to require 
facilities to report their latitude and longitude if the facility does 
not have a physical street address. The EPA received comment that the 
rule should specify the precise latitude and longitude that should be 
reported (i.e., centroid of the plant or part of the ``administration 
building''). As a result of this comment we revised the requirement to 
clarify that facilities required to submit a latitude and longitude 
should report the geographic centroid or center point of the 
facility.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ We are finalizing confidentiality determinations for the 
revised data element in 40 CFR 98.3(c)(1). See Section V of this 
preamble for additional information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The final amendments replace the proposed term, ``ORIS code,'' with 
the term ``plant code,'' and the proposed definition has been revised 
to include both facilities that have been assigned a Plant ID code by 
the Department of Energy's (DOE) Energy Information Administration 
(EIA) and those have not been assigned this code but that otherwise 
report to EPA's Clean Air Markets Division (CAMD) and so have been 
assigned a plant code by CAMD. The final amendments reflect a 
definition of ``plant code'' under 40 CFR 98.6 that is largely derived 
from the definition of this term on the Certificate of Representation 
(EPA Form 7610-1 (Revised 8-2011)) \22\ that is used for domestic 
NOX and SO2 trading programs. The associated 
reporting requirement that was originally proposed at 40 CFR 
98.3(c)(13) has been divided into a general facility-level reporting 
requirement under subpart A (to identify reporters who have been 
assigned a plant code) and configuration-level requirements to report 
the code under subparts C and D.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Available at http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/business/docs/forms/CertofRepFINAL.pdf.
    \23\ We are finalizing confidentiality determinations for the 
new data elements in 40 CFR 98.3(c)(13) and 40 CFR 98.36. See 
Section V of this preamble for additional information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA is not finalizing the definition of ``Fluidized Bed 
Combustor (FBC)'' because the associated subpart C emissions factors 
are not being finalized at this time. See Section II.B of this

[[Page 71918]]

preamble for more information about the FBC-specific emission factors.
    We are finalizing a provision, as proposed, to include instructions 
for the reporting of a United States parent company legal name and 
address. The final amendments to the parent company reporting 
requirements under 40 CFR 98.3(c)(11)(viii) reflect that reporters are 
required to use any common naming rules or guidelines provided via the 
Electronic Greenhouse Gas Reporting Tool (e-GGRT) in formatting and 
submitting their parent company names. This will ensure consistent 
reporting of a given parent company name between different facilities 
with that parent company and transparency of which facility's or 
supplier's emissions may, in whole or in part, be attributed to a given 
parent company. This amendment is being finalized as proposed.
    The EPA is also finalizing the following amendments as proposed. We 
are amending 40 CFR 98.3(h)(4) to clarify the provisions for requesting 
an extension of the 45-day period for submission of revised reports in 
40 CFR 98.3(h)(1) and (2). Finally, we are revising the definitions of 
``degasification system'', ``ventilation well or shaft'', and 
``ventilation system'' to more closely align with common terminology 
used in the coal mining industry (subpart FF).
4. Summary of Comments and Responses--Other Corrections and Amendments 
to Subpart A
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to the proposed corrections and amendments to subpart A. See 
the comment response document for subpart A in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2012-0934 for a complete listing of all comments and responses 
related to subpart A.
    Comment: Many commenters supported the requirement for electricity 
generators to report their ORIS codes, but requested clarifications or 
revisions to the proposal. Commenters pointed out that the definition 
should be revised to indicate that ORIS codes can have up to five 
digits, and several commenters pointed out that the proposed definition 
reflects that these codes are plant-level attributes while the proposed 
language of the reporting requirement described the codes as unit-level 
attributes. One commenter recommended that the rule clearly restrict 
the ORIS code reporting requirement to power plants which are subject 
to both EIA's Form 860 reporting requirements and to 40 CFR part 98. 
Another commenter stated that the proposal would require operators to 
report the same ORIS code for each unit at a single facility.
    Response: The final amendments do not define the term ``ORIS code'' 
but instead define the term ``plant code'' based largely on the 
following definition from the Certificate of Representation (EPA Form 
7610-1 (Revised 8-2011)) used for the EPA's NOX and 
SO2 trading programs:

    A plant code is a 4 or 5 digit number assigned by the Department 
of Energy's (DOE) Energy Information Administration (EIA) to 
facilities that generate electricity. For older facilities, ``plant 
code'' is synonymous with ``ORISPL'' and ``Facility'' codes. If the 
facility generates electricity but no plant code has been assigned, 
or if there is uncertainty regarding what the plant code is, send an 
email to the EIA. The email address is EIA-860@eia.gov. For 
facilities that do not produce electricity, use the facility 
identifier assigned by EPA (beginning with ``88'').

    Due to the recurring comment that an ORIS code is a plant-level 
attribute that was proposed as a unit-level reporting requirement, the 
final amendments clarify that the plant code should, in fact, be 
reported at the unit-level or configuration-level under Part 98 because 
of differences between EIA conventions for delineating plant-sites and 
the definition of ``facility'' under 40 CFR 98.6. Reporting of the 
plant code at the unit-level or configuration-level is necessary 
because some groups of combustion units that are under common control 
are considered to be multiple plant-sites by EIA. For example, the 
generating facility assigned EIA plant code 3250 is a generating plant 
with 12 peaking units that is adjacent to a base load plant assigned 
EIA plant code 3251. Because these two EIA plant-sites are adjacent and 
owned by the same utility company, they are considered a single 
``facility'' as that term is defined in 40 CFR 98.6. While one 
commenter's statement that all units at a single facility would report 
the same ORIS code is valid for the majority of Part 98 facilities, 
this statement is not universally valid. The final rule clarifies these 
points. However, because plant codes are being treated as unit-level 
attributes under Part 98, the associated reporting requirements are 
being promulgated with other unit-level requirements under subpart C.
    Comment: Two commenters expressed concern that the EPA would use 
the new provision in 40 CFR 98.3(c)(11)(vii) to assign parent companies 
to a given facility or supplier or make changes to a facility or 
supplier's certified report after it is submitted. It was also noted 
that the EPA did not indicate if the company naming convention would be 
revised for previously submitted reports or only apply to reports 
submitted going forward.
    Response: The EPA notes that the proposed language ``standardized 
conventions for the naming of a parent company'' refers to the style 
guide currently referenced as a suggested template for parent company 
reporting in e-GGRT. This style guide covers items such as common 
punctuation and abbreviation use in parent company names and is 
included to avoid having facilities with the same parent company report 
that parent company in different formats (i.e. ABC Corp. vs. ABC 
Corporation vs. A.B.C. Corp.). The list of parent companies provided in 
e-GGRT provides a list of company names that are already formatted in-
line with the style guide. Currently, reporters have the option to use 
a parent company name on the provided list or enter a separate parent 
company name if their parent company is not listed on the provided 
list. Those two options would remain in place with this change, and 
reporters will not be limited to only selecting a parent company from 
the list provided in e-GGRT. This change does require that, if a 
reporter does not choose a company on the list provided in e-GGRT, they 
must follow the style guide to ensure their parent company name is 
entered in a manner consistent with other reporters. Again, the style 
guide is limited to formatting requirements, such as punctuation and 
abbreviation (i.e., U.S. vs. US vs. United States).
    This change does not give the EPA permission to alter the parent 
company information certified and submitted by reporters. If, in the 
process of future report verification, EPA notes that the style guide 
was not followed, then the EPA may ask the reporter to correct the 
parent company name to adhere to the format in the style guide. In this 
situation, the reporter would make any changes to the reported parent 
company name, not EPA. The EPA does not intend to require resubmission 
of reports for previous years solely to update the parent company name 
to comply with this new provision.
    The conventions in the style guide are consistent with other EPA 
programs, such as the Toxics Release Inventory, which provides 
consistency for those parent companies that report under multiple 
programs. For the reasons and clarifying statements mentioned above, 
the EPA is finalizing this regulatory text change as proposed.
    Comment: One commenter objected to EPA's proposal to revise the 
parent company requirements under 40 CFR

[[Page 71919]]

98.3(c)(11) without first completing a revised Information Collection 
Request (ICR).
    Response: The regulatory text related to standardizing of parent 
company names does not add any new reporting requirements to subpart A. 
Rather, it clarifies the format used for submitting parent company 
names under 40 CFR 98.3(c)(11) to provide consistency for both 
reporters and the public viewing the data. Because this change is a 
formatting change for an existing requirement, the EPA has determined 
an ICR amendment is not required.

B. Subpart C--General Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources

1. Summary of Final Amendments
    We are generally finalizing revisions to the requirements of 40 CFR 
part 98, subpart C (General Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources) as 
proposed. The revisions clarify the use of the Tier methodologies and 
update high heat value (HHV) and emission factors for several fuels. 
The more substantive corrections, clarifying, and other amendments to 
subpart C are found here. We are finalizing all of the minor 
corrections to subpart C presented in the Table of 2013 Revisions as 
proposed (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934).
    First, we are finalizing a change to 40 CFR 98.33(b)(1), as 
proposed, that will allow the Tier 1 methodology to be used for Table 
C-1 fuels that are combusted in a unit with a maximum rated heat input 
capacity greater than 250 million Btus per hour, if the fuel provides 
less than 10 percent of the annual heat input to the unit and the use 
of Tier 4 is not required.
    As previously discussed in Section II.A.3 of this preamble, the 
proposed requirement for certain facilities to report their plant 
code(s) (as defined under 40 CFR 98.6) is being finalized as unit-level 
and configuration-level reporting requirements under subpart C. The 
final amendments require reporting of this code at the unit-level or 
configuration-level in the applicable methodology-specific paragraphs 
in subpart C (i.e., paragraphs for Tiers 1-3, Tier 4, common pipe, 
common stack, aggregation of units, and Part 75 reporting 
methodologies) in order to facilitate cross-referencing GHGRP data with 
other publicly available state and federal data resources. The plant 
code reporting requirement applies to each stationary combustion source 
(i.e., each individual unit and each group of units reported as a 
configuration) that includes at least one combustion unit that has been 
assigned a plant code.
    We are not finalizing the proposed change to the default biogenic 
fraction of CO2 for MSW. After consideration of public 
comments, the EPA performed an analysis that supports retaining the 
existing default MSW biogenic CO2 fraction of 0.6. (See 
``Analysis of Default Biogenic CO2 Fraction for Municipal 
Solid Waste (MSW)'', June 24, 2013 in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-
0934).
    We are revising Table C-1 as proposed to update the HHV and/or 
emission factors for several fuels. The amendments to Table C-1, as 
discussed in the memorandum ``Review and Evaluation of 40 CFR Part 98 
CO2 Emission Factors for EPW07072 To 45'' (see Docket Id. 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934), include: (1) Replacing ``Wood and Wood 
Residuals'' with ``Wood and Wood Residuals (dry basis),'' with a 
footnote containing an equation that can be used to adjust the HHV 
value for any moisture content; (2) replacing ``Biogas (captured 
methane)'' with two types of biogas: ``Landfill Gas'' and ``Other 
Biomass Gases;'' (3) revising the HHV and/or emission factors for 
liquid petroleum gases (LPG) and LPG components including propane, 
ethane, ethylene, isobutane, isobutylene, butane, and butylene; (4) 
correcting the emission factor for coke and revising the name to ``coal 
coke'' to differentiate it from ``petroleum coke;'' (5) updating 
emission factors for the four types of coal and the four types of mixed 
coals; (6) revising the HHV for the biomass fuel ``solid byproducts;'' 
and, (7) finalizing minor changes to the HHV and/or emission factors 
for natural gas, used oil, natural gasoline, petrochemical feedstocks, 
unfinished oils, crude oil, and tires.
    We are revising Table C-2 to add CH4 and N2O 
emission factors for ``fuel gas'' and ``wood and wood residuals'', as 
proposed.
    The EPA is not finalizing the proposed addition of waste coals 
(waste anthracite (culm) and waste bituminous (gob)) to Table C-1, and 
is not finalizing the proposed FBC-specific N2O emission 
factors for coal and waste coal to Table C-2. As discussed in the 
preamble to the proposed rule, the EPA reviewed multiple studies that 
indicate N2O emissions from these units when burning coal 
and waste coal are significantly higher than from conventional 
combustion technologies. We received comments that included additional 
data, which is discussed in Section II.B.2 of this preamble. The EPA 
will study this data to inform any future rulemaking to address this 
issue.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to the proposed amendments to subpart C. See the comment 
response document for subpart C in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934 
for a complete listing of all comments and responses related to subpart 
C.
    Comment: Two commenters stated that the Wojtowicz study \24\ used 
by the EPA to develop the proposed N2O emission factors for 
FBCs is not relevant to the large-scale FBC systems that are subject to 
Part 98. These commenters also provided a field study \25\ of FBC 
emissions conducted by R.A. Brown, et al. Because the Brown study 
documents N2O emission rates that are lower than the 
proposed emission factors, these commenters expressed concerns that the 
proposed N2O emission factors will over estimate emissions 
from FBCs, and they concluded that the underlying Wojtowicz study 
should not be used to develop emission estimates for large-scale FBC 
systems. These commenters also believe that the EPA did not include in 
the docket a detailed description of the methodology used to derive the 
N2O emission factors from the Wojtowicz study.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ M.A. Wojtowicz, et al., Combustion of Coal as a Source of 
N2O Emission, 34 Fuel Processing Tech. 1(1993), EPA-HQ-
OAR-2012-0934-0029.
    \25\ R.A. Brown, et al., N2O Emissions from Fluidized 
Bed Combustion, Proceedings of the 11th International Meeting on 
Fluidized Bed Combustion, March 1991.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Response: The EPA appreciates the N2O emissions and 
operating data from the Brown study provided by the commenters. We are 
not finalizing the proposed FBC-specific emission factors to allow time 
to study the additional data provided with the comments.
    Comment: Several commenters disagreed with the EPA's proposal to 
reduce the default MSW biogenic CO2 fraction from 0.60 to 
0.55 and requested that the EPA use the actual MSW fractions reported 
by all municipal waste combustors (MWCs) for the first three years of 
the GHGRP (2010-2012) to determine an appropriate default.
    Response: In response to these comments, the EPA performed an 
analysis of all quarterly MSW biogenic CO2 fractions 
(determined using ASTM D7459-08 and ASTM D6866-08) submitted through 
the GHGRP in reporting years 2010 through 2012. Quarterly MSW biogenic 
CO2 fractions were averaged for each MWC to determine each 
unit's annual average MSW biogenic CO2 fraction. The 
weighted average (based on the reported

[[Page 71920]]

unit level biogenic CO2 emissions) for all MWC annual 
averages was determined to be 0.62. The result of this analysis 
supports retaining the existing default MSW biogenic CO2 
fraction of 0.60. (See ``Analysis of Default Biogenic CO2 
Fraction for Municipal Solid Waste (MSW)'', June 24, 2013 in Docket Id. 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934).

C. Subpart H--Cement Production

    We are finalizing one revision to the reporting requirements of 40 
CFR part 98, subpart H (Cement Production), as proposed. We are 
amending 40 CFR 98.86(a)(2) to require reporting of facility-wide 
cement production. This change will provide consistency in the 
reporting requirements for facilities using continuous emissions 
monitoring system (CEMS) and not using CEMS. The EPA received one 
comment supporting the proposed change to subpart H.

D. Subpart K--Ferroalloy Production

    We are finalizing two corrections to subpart K of Part 98 
(Ferroalloy Production) as proposed. First, we are correcting Equation 
K-3 to revise the numerical term ``2000/2205'' to ``2/2205''. Next, we 
are amending 40 CFR 98.116(e) to require the reporting of the annual 
process CH4 emissions (in metric tons) from each electric 
arc furnace (EAF) used for the production of any ferroalloy listed in 
Table K-1 of subpart K of Part 98. These amendments are necessary for 
consistent reporting of CH4 emissions from all ferroalloy 
production facilities. The EPA received no comments on the proposed 
changes to subpart K.

E. Subpart L--Fluorinated Gas Production

    The EPA is amending subpart L of Part 98 (Fluorinated Gas 
Production) to extend temporary, less detailed reporting requirements 
for fluorinated gas producers for an additional year, as proposed. The 
extension requires the same less detailed reporting for reporting year 
2013 as for reporting years 2011 and 2012. The extension allows the 
EPA, as well as stakeholders, to consider the various options for 
reporting emissions under subpart L. We are finalizing all of the minor 
corrections to subpart L presented in the Table of 2013 Revisions as 
proposed (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934). The EPA received no 
comments objecting to the proposed changes to subpart L.

F. Subpart N--Glass Production

    We are finalizing several clarifying revisions to subpart N of Part 
98 (Glass Production) as proposed. The more substantive corrections, 
clarifying, and other amendments to subpart N are found here. We are 
finalizing all of the minor corrections to subpart N presented in the 
Table of 2013 Revisions as proposed. The EPA received no comments 
objecting to the proposed changes to subpart N.
    We are revising 40 CFR 98.144(b) as proposed to specify that 
reporters determining the carbonate-based mineral mass fraction must 
use sampling methods that specify X-ray fluorescence.
    Additionally, we are removing ASTM D6349-09 and ASTM D3682-01 from 
the requirements in 98.144(b) as proposed. These amendments allow 
reporters flexibility in choosing a sampling method (because multiple 
X-ray fluorescence methods are available). For measurements made in the 
emission reporting year 2013 or prior years, reporters continue to have 
the option to use ASTM D6349-09 and ASTM D3682-01. Reporters are not 
required to revise previously submitted annual reports. Facilities have 
the option, but are not required, to use the newly proposed option for 
the reports submitted to EPA in 2013.

G. Subpart O--HFC-22 Production and HFC-23 Destruction

    The EPA is finalizing clarifying amendments and other corrections 
to subpart O (HFC-22 Production and HFC-23 Destruction) as proposed. 
The more substantive corrections, clarifying, and other amendments to 
subpart O are found in this section. We are finalizing all of the minor 
corrections to subpart O presented in the Table of 2013 Revisions as 
proposed.
    We are adding a sentence to 40 CFR 98.156(c) to clarify how to 
report the HFC-23 concentration at the outlet of the destruction device 
in the event that the concentration falls below the detection limit of 
the measuring device. The final rule clarifies that in this situation, 
facilities are required to report the detection limit of the measuring 
device and that the concentration was below that detection limit. The 
EPA received no comments on the proposed changes to subpart O.

H. Subpart P--Hydrogen Production

1. Summary of Final Amendments
    The EPA is finalizing the corrections and clarifications to subpart 
P as proposed. The more substantive corrections, clarifying, and other 
amendments to subpart P are found here. Additional minor corrections, 
including minor edits to the final rule, are presented in the Table of 
2013 Revisions (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934). The EPA 
received no comments objecting to the proposed changes to subpart P.
    We are finalizing 40 CFR 98.163(b), as proposed, to clarify that 
when the fuel and feedstock material balance approach is followed, the 
average carbon content and molecular weight for each month used in 
Equations P-1, P-2, or P-3 may be based on analyses performed annually 
or analyses performed more frequently than monthly (based on the 
requirements of 40 CFR 98.164(b)). Additionally, we are revising the 
term definitions in Equations P-1, P-2, and P-3 to remove references to 
the frequency of analyses in equation terms ``CCn'' and 
``MWn'' in Equation P-1 and equation term ``CCp'' 
in Equations P-2 and P-3, since the analysis frequencies are not 
described in the introductory text at 40 CFR 98.163(b), as discussed 
above.
    The final amendments to subpart P include revising the equation 
term ``Fdstckn'' in Equations P-1 and P-2 and revising the 
language in paragraphs 40 CFR 98.166(b)(2) and (b)(5). These changes 
optionally allow the gaseous or liquid feedstock quantity to be 
measured on a mass basis in addition to the already-specified 
volumetric basis. The change to the equation term 
``Fdstckn'' is consistent with changes made to subpart X, 
and allows the results from flow meters that measure gas and liquid 
materials on a mass basis to be used directly in Equation P-1 or P-2 
without first having to perform unit conversions. All changes add 
flexibility for reporters, and should lead to fewer reporting errors.
    We are modifying 40 CFR 98.164(b)(5) as proposed by allowing a 
facility to analyze fuels and feedstocks using chromatographic 
analysis, whether continuous or non-continuous. Additionally, we are 
moving recordkeeping requirements 40 CFR 98.164(c) and (d) to new 
paragraphs 40 CFR 98.167(c) and (d) in 40 CFR 98.167 (Records that must 
be retained). Finally, we are revising 40 CFR 98.166(a)(2) and (a)(3) 
to remove the requirement to report hydrogen and ammonia production for 
all units combined. These amendments are finalized as proposed. The EPA 
received no comments objecting to the proposed changes to subpart P.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses
    See the comment response document in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2012-0934 for a complete listing of all comments and responses related 
to

[[Page 71921]]

subpart P. The EPA received only supportive comments for subpart P, 
therefore, there are no changes from proposal to the final rule based 
on these comments.

I. Subpart Q--Iron and Steel Production

1. Summary of Final Amendments
    The EPA is finalizing clarifying amendments to subpart Q (Iron and 
Steel Production) as proposed. The more substantive corrections, 
clarifying, and other amendments to subpart Q are found here. We are 
finalizing all of the minor corrections presented in the Table of 2013 
Revisions as proposed (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934).
    We are amending the definition of the iron and steel production 
source category in subpart Q, 40 CFR 98.170, as proposed, to include 
direct reduction furnaces not co-located with an integrated iron and 
steel manufacturing process. We are amending Equation Q-5 in subpart Q 
to account for the use of gaseous fuels in EAFs. Specifically, we are 
modifying Equation Q-5 by adding terms to account for the amount of 
gaseous fuel combusted and the carbon content of the gaseous fuel. We 
are also amending Equation Q-5 by correcting the term ``Cf'' 
to ``Cflux'' and the term ``Cc'' to 
``Ccarbon'' to match those presented in the definitions, and 
to add a closing bracket at the end of the equation. These amendments 
are finalized as proposed.
    We are revising 40 CFR 98.173(d) as proposed to clarify when the 
Tier 4 calculation methodology must be used to calculate and report 
combined stack emissions. The amendment clarifies that the Tier 4 
calculation methodology should be used (and emissions reported under 
subpart C of Part 98) if the GHG emissions from a taconite indurating 
furnace, basic oxygen furnace, non-recovery coke oven battery, sinter 
process, EAF, decarburization vessel, or direct reduction furnace are 
vented through a stack equipped with a CEMS that complies with the Tier 
4 methodology in subpart C of this part, or through the same stack as 
any combustion unit or process equipment that reports CO2 
emissions using a CEMS that complies with the Tier 4 Calculation 
Methodology in subpart C.
    We are amending 40 CFR 98.174(c)(2) as proposed by removing the 
term ``furnace'' from the statement ``For the furnace exhaust,'' 
because decarburization vessels are not furnaces. We are also amending 
40 CFR 98.174(c)(2) by dividing (c)(2) into two separate sub paragraphs 
to separately specify the sampling time for continuously charged EAFs. 
We are removing the term ``production cycles'' for continuous EAFs and 
provide owners or operators with the option of sampling for a period 
spanning at least three hours. These amendments are finalized as 
proposed.
    We are amending 40 CFR 98.175(a) as proposed to clarify that 100 
percent data availability is not required for process inputs and 
outputs that contribute less than one percent of the total mass of 
carbon into or out of the process. Similarly, we are finalizing the 
amendment to 40 CFR 98.176(e) clarifying that the reporting 
requirements of 40 CFR 98.176(e) do not apply to process inputs and 
outputs that contribute less than one percent of the total mass of 
carbon into or out of the process.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses
    See the comment response document in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2012-0934 for a complete listing of all comments and responses related 
to subpart Q. The EPA received only supportive comments for subpart Q, 
therefore, there are no changes from proposal to the final rule based 
on these comments.

J. Subpart W--Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems

    The EPA is amending subpart W to incorporate minor revisions to 
three equations for consistency with the revisions to Table A-1 that we 
are finalizing in this action. The subpart W calculations for annual 
mass of GHG emissions for gas pneumatic device venting and natural gas 
driven pneumatic pump venting in CO2e are calculated using a 
conversion factor that was developed using the methane GWP from Table 
A-1. The affected equations are Equation W-1, which calculates the mass 
of CO2e using a conversion factor (Convi) that is 
developed from the methane GWP; Equation W-2, which also calculates the 
mass of CO2e using a conversion factor (Convi) 
that is developed from the methane GWP; and Equation W-36 in 40 CFR 
98.233(u)(2)(v), which incorporates numeric GWPs for CH4 and 
N2O. Because the GWP values that inform the methane 
calculations in these three equations reference the previous GWP value, 
each equation needs to be amended separately to change the numeric GWP. 
While the EPA proposed that the new GWP apply throughout all of Part 
98, the EPA did not specifically propose amendments to the regulatory 
text referencing the numeric GWP in these three discrete equations. In 
addition to finalizing the GWP value for methane in Table A-1, we are 
also amending the methane conversion factor and methane GWP used in 
these three subpart W equations to ensure the correct GWP value for 
methane in Table A-1 is used in these calculations.

K. Subpart X--Petrochemical Production

1. Summary of Final Amendments
    The EPA is finalizing corrections and clarifications to subpart X. 
The more substantive corrections, clarifying, and other amendments to 
subpart X are found here. Additional minor corrections to subpart X, 
including changes to the final rule, are discussed in the Table of 2013 
Revisions (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934).
    We are finalizing several amendments to subpart X as proposed. We 
are revising the calculation methodology in 40 CFR 98.243(b) for 
CH4 and N2O emissions from burning process off-
gas for reporters using the CEMS method to determine CO2 
emissions; the revision requires reporters to use Equation C-10 of 
subpart C of Part 98. Reporters must use the cumulative annual heat 
input from combustion of the off-gas (mmBtu) and fuel gas emission 
factors from Table C-2 to calculate emissions of CH4 and 
N2O. We are revising 40 CFR 98.243(c)(3) and 40 CFR 
98.244(b)(4) to allow subpart X reporters that use the mass balance 
calculation method to obtain carbon content measurements from a 
customer of the product. Additionally, we are revising 40 CFR 
98.243(c)(4) to allow the alternative sampling requirements to be used 
during all times that the average monthly concentration is above 99.5 
percent of a single compound for reporters using the mass balance 
calculation method. We are also replacing the Equation X-1 parameters 
``(MWf)i'' and ``(MWp)i'' 
with parameters ``(MWf)i,n'' and 
``(MWp)i,n'', respectively, and adding the 
associated equation term definitions, and revising the definitions for 
the terms ``Cg'', ``(Fgf)i,n'' and 
``(Pgp)i,n'' in Equation X-1 as proposed.
    We are revising the test method description for chromatographic 
analysis in 40 CFR 98.244(b)(4)(xiii) to remove the word ``gas''. We 
are also modifying 40 CFR 98.244(b)(4)(xv) to allow additional methods 
for the analysis of carbon black feedstock oils and carbon black 
products. We are revising the missing data procedures in 40 CFR 98.245 
to clarify that the procedures for missing fuel carbon contents in 40 
CFR 98.35(b)(1) are to be used only for missing feedstock and

[[Page 71922]]

product carbon contents, and the procedures for missing fuel usage in 
40 CFR 98.35(b)(2) are to be used to develop substitute values for 
missing feedstock and product flow rates. We are also adding missing 
data requirements for missing flare data and for missing molecular 
weights for gaseous feedstocks and products. These amendments are 
finalized as proposed.
    We are finalizing two amendments to clarify the reporting 
requirements of 40 CFR 98.246(a)(6) for reporters using the mass 
balance method. Specifically, we are amending 40 CFR 98.246(a)(6) to 
require reporters to report the name of each method that is used to 
determine carbon content or molecular weight in accordance with 40 CFR 
98.244(b)(4). We are also requiring reporters to describe each type of 
device used to determine flow or mass (e.g., flow meter or weighing 
device) and identify the method used to determine flow or mass for each 
device in accordance with 40 CFR 98.244(b)(1) through (b)(3). We are 
revising 40 CFR 98.246(a)(8) to specify that reporters using the mass 
balance calculation method must identify combustion units outside of 
the petrochemical process unit that burned process off-gas. These 
amendments are finalized as proposed.
    As proposed, we are removing the requirements in 40 CFR 
98.246(b)(4) and (b)(5) to report CO2, CH4, and 
N2O emissions from each CEMS location and the requirement to 
report the aggregated total emissions from all CEMS locations. In 40 
CFR 98.246(b)(5) we are removing the requirements to report inputs to 
Equation C-8. Instead of the Equation C-8 inputs, reporters will report 
the total annual heat input for Equation C-10, as required in 40 CFR 
98.35(c)(2). Finally, we are removing the requirement to identify each 
stationary combustion unit that burns petrochemical process off-gas. 
These amendments are finalized as proposed.
    The final amendments include several changes to proposed language 
to better reflect our intent but that do not change the underlying 
requirement. For example, a proposed change in 40 CFR 98.242(b)(2) 
specified that emissions from burning petrochemical process off-gas in 
any combustion unit are not to be reported under subpart C. The final 
amendments clarify that ``any combustion unit'' includes combustion 
units that are not part of the petrochemical process unit.
    The final amendments to subpart X include changes to the proposed 
quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) requirements for flare gas 
monitoring instruments. After consideration of a public comment, we are 
specifying in the final amendments (40 CFR 98.244(c)) that reporters 
using the methodology in 40 CFR 98.243(b) or (d) must be complying with 
all applicable QA/QC requirements in 40 CFR 98.254(b) through (e) for 
flare gas monitoring instruments beginning no later than January 1, 
2015. The proposed amendments did not specify when reporters would be 
required to comply with these requirements. The final amendments also 
clarify that QA/QC requirements for flare gas monitoring instruments 
apply in the same manner as under other subparts such as subpart Y. 
Specifically, if a facility has installed a flare gas monitor, then 
specified QA/QC requirements apply to that monitor. However, if the 
reporter estimates a flare gas characteristic based on engineering 
records or other information, as allowed under 40 CFR 98.253(b)(1) 
through (b)(3), then the QA/QC requirements in 40 CFR 98.254(b) through 
(e) do not apply.
    The final amendments include changes to clarify the reporting 
requirements in 40 CFR 98.246(a)(9) for reporters using the alternative 
to sampling and analysis in 40 CFR 98.243(c)(4). The proposed changes 
to this section addressed various reporting requirements related to 
off-spec production of a product. The final amendments clarify that the 
off-spec production reporting requirements apply only if the 
alternative methodology is being used for the product in question. The 
purpose of the off-spec reporting is to ensure that appropriate carbon 
content values are being used. Carbon content of a feedstock is not 
affected by process upsets that result in off-spec product. Thus, there 
is no need to report off-spec product when the alternative methodology 
is being used only for a feedstock. This section of subpart X also 
requires reporting of the dates of any process changes that reduce the 
composition of the primary component in the subject stream to less than 
99.5 percent. According to 40 CFR 98.243(c)(4), the alternative 
methodology is not allowed if the ``average monthly'' concentration 
falls below 99.5 percent. Thus, to make the two sections consistent, 
the final amendments to 40 CFR 98.246(a)(9) require reporting of dates 
of process changes that cause the ``monthly average'' composition to 
fall below 99.5 percent.
    The final amendments also include changes to 40 CFR 98.246(b)(4). 
The proposed amendments to this section required reporting of an 
estimate of the fraction of total CO2 emissions measured by 
the CEMS that is ``attributable to the petrochemical process unit.'' 
After further consideration, we determined that the term ``attributable 
to'' may be ambiguous. Therefore, the final amendments clarify that the 
emissions to use in estimating the fraction include both CO2 
directly emitted by the process plus CO2 generated by 
combustion of off-gas from the petrochemical process unit.\26\ The 
final amendments also include several additional changes throughout 
subpart X to replace incorrect paragraph references as well as to fix 
formatting, typographical, and grammatical errors. All of these 
changes, as well as the changes that are described in more detail 
above, are presented in the Table of Revisions to this rulemaking (see 
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ We are finalizing confidentiality determinations for the 
revised data element in 40 CFR 98.246(b)(4). See Section V of this 
preamble for additional information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA received two suggested revisions for subpart X that are 
beyond the scope of this rulemaking. These included a request to report 
vinyl chloride monomer production in lieu of ethylene dichloride 
production, and a request for alternative options for determining and 
reporting carbon content of small feedstock streams (streams that 
constitute less than 0.5% of the total feedstock flow on an annual 
basis). Although we are not including the suggested revisions in this 
final rule, the EPA is considering these comments for inclusion in a 
future rulemaking. See the comment response document for subpart X in 
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934 for additional information.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to the proposed amendments to subpart X. See the comment 
response document for subpart X in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934 
for a complete listing of all comments and responses related to subpart 
X.
    Comment: One commenter stated that the EPA should provide 
additional time for reporters to add any existing flare gas monitoring 
instrumentation to the GHG Monitoring Plan and into existing 
maintenance database systems to ensure that they are calibrated in 
accordance with the new QA/QC requirements in 40 CFR 98.244(c). The 
commenter stated that the compliance date should be no earlier than 
July 1, 2014.
    Response: We agree with the commenter that some time is needed for

[[Page 71923]]

reporters to modify their monitoring plans and maintenance systems if 
they are not already implementing procedures consistent with the new 
requirements. Although compliance could be achieved any time during a 
year, for reporting purposes we have set the compliance date at the 
beginning of a reporting year. While we considered setting the 
compliance date on January 1, 2014, we determined that that date would 
not provide sufficient time for all facilities to come into compliance 
with these requirements. We determined that January 1, 2015 would 
provide sufficient time for all facilities to come into compliance 
regardless of the number of flares they use or the number of monitoring 
instruments that they use.

L. Subpart Y--Petroleum Refineries

1. Summary of Final Amendments
    The EPA is finalizing changes, technical corrections, and 
clarifying amendments to subpart Y (Petroleum Refineries) as proposed. 
The more substantive corrections, clarifying, and other amendments to 
subpart Y are found here. Additional minor corrections, including 
changes to the final rule, are presented in the Table of 2013 Revisions 
(see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934).
    As proposed, we are revising in 40 CFR 98.252(a) the reference to 
the default emission factors for ``Petroleum (All fuel types in Table 
C-1)'' to ``Fuel Gas'' and in 40 CFR 98.253(b)(2) and (b)(3) from 
``Petroleum Products'' to ``Fuel Gas'' for calculation of 
CH4 and N2O from combustion of fuel gas.
    We are revising 40 CFR 98.253(f)(2), (f)(3), and (f)(4) and the 
terms ``FSG'' and ``MFc'' in Equation Y-12 as 
proposed to clarify the calculation methods for sulfur recovery plants 
to address both on-site and off-site sulfur recovery plants. We are 
also revising the reporting requirements in 40 CFR 98.256(h) as 
proposed in order to clarify the reporting requirements for on-site and 
off-site units.
    As proposed, we are clarifying 40 CFR 98.253(j) regarding when 
Equation Y-19 must be used for calculation of CH4 and 
CO2 emissions. The change clarifies that Equation Y-19 must 
be used to calculate CH4 emissions if the reporter elected 
to use the method in 40 CFR 98.253(i)(1), and may be used to calculate 
CO2 and/or CH4 emissions, as applicable, if the 
reporter elects this method as an alternative to the methods in 
paragraphs (f), (h), or (k) of 40 CFR 98.253. We are also clarifying 
reporting requirements to 40 CFR 98.256(j) and (k) as proposed to 
specify that when Equation Y-19 is used for asphalt blowing operations 
or delayed coking units, the facility must report the relevant 
information required under 40 CFR 98.256(l)(5) rather than all of the 
reporting elements in 40 CFR 98.256(l).
2. Summary of Comments and Responses
    See the comment response document in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2012-0934 for a complete listing of all comments and responses related 
to subpart Y. The EPA did not receive any significant comments on this 
subpart and there are no changes from proposal to the final rule based 
on these comments.

M. Subpart Z--Phosphoric Acid Production

1. Summary of Final Amendments
    The EPA is finalizing the amendments to subpart Z (Phosphoric Acid 
Production) as proposed. The more substantive corrections, clarifying, 
and other amendments to subpart Z of Part 98 are discussed in this 
section. Additional minor corrections are discussed in the Table of 
2013 Revisions (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934). We are 
finalizing all of the minor corrections presented in the Table of 2013 
Revisions as proposed. The EPA received one comment requesting 
clarification on the proposed changes to subpart Z. See the comment 
response document in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934 for a complete 
listing of all comments and responses related to subpart Z.
    We are amending 40 CFR 98.263(b)(1)(ii) and the description of 
``CO2n,i'' as proposed to indicate that the sampling method 
provides CO2 content, and not emissions. We are also 
revising 40 CFR 98.266(b) as proposed to require that the annual report 
must include the annual phosphoric acid production capacity (tons), 
rather than the annual permitted phosphoric acid production capacity. 
Finally, we are amending 40 CFR 98.266 as proposed to add a requirement 
to report the number of times missing data procedures were used to 
estimate the CO2 content of the phosphate rock.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses
    See the comment response document in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2012-0934 for a complete listing of all comments and responses related 
to subpart Z. The EPA did not receive any significant comments for this 
subpart, therefore, there are no changes from proposal to the final 
rule based on these comments.

N. Subpart AA--Pulp and Paper Manufacturing

1. Summary of Final Amendments
    The EPA is finalizing the corrections and clarifications to subpart 
AA as proposed and is removing the subpart AA requirement to report 
paper production in response to public comments. The more substantive 
corrections, clarifying, and other amendments to subpart AA of Part 98 
are discussed in this section. We are finalizing all of the minor 
corrections presented in the Table of 2013 Revisions.
    As proposed, we are amending 40 CFR 98.276(k) to clarify the EPA's 
intent regarding the annual pulp and/or paper production information 
that must be reported. In the final amendments, we are eliminating the 
requirement to report paper production and further clarifying that the 
pulp production total to be reported under subpart AA includes only 
virgin chemical pulp produced onsite.
    We are revising Tables AA-1 and AA-2 as proposed to include the 
CH4 and N2O emission factors for each individual 
fuel and adding kraft lime kiln N2O factors.
    We are also revising Table AA-2 to (1) Amend the title to remove 
the reference to fossil fuel since the table also includes a biomass 
fuel (i.e., biogas); (2) specify that the emission factors for residual 
and distillate oil apply for any type of residual (no. 5 or 6) or 
distillate (no. 1, 2 or 4) fuel oil; and (3) add a row to specify that 
the Table C-2 emission factor for CH4 and the Table C-2 
emission factors for CH4 and N2O may be used, 
respectively, for lime kilns and calciners combusting fuels (e.g., 
propane, used oil, and lubricants) that are not listed in Table AA-2.
    The EPA received one comment suggesting a revision to subpart AA 
that is beyond the scope of this rulemaking. Specifically, the 
commenter requested revisions to the missing data reporting 
requirements for spent liquor solids in 40 CFR 98.275. Although we are 
not including the suggested revisions in this final rule, the EPA is 
considering these comments for inclusion in a future rulemaking. See 
the comment response document for subpart AA in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2012-0934 for additional information.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to the proposed amendments to subpart AA. See the comment 
response document for subpart AA in Docket Id.

[[Page 71924]]

No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart AA.
    Comment: A commenter requested clarification regarding inclusion of 
non-chemical pulp (e.g., mechanical pulp) in the pulp production total 
to be reported. The commenter also requested that paper production be 
eliminated from the subpart AA reporting requirements because paper 
production does not relate to GHG emissions generated in the pulp mill 
and reported under subpart AA.
    Response: In the final amendments we are clarifying that the pulp 
production total to be reported is the total air-dried, unbleached 
virgin chemical pulp produced onsite during the reporting year and that 
mechanical pulp does not need to be included in the total. Greenhouse 
gas emissions reported under subpart AA depend on the amount of pulp 
produced using chemical (e.g., kraft, soda, sulfite, and semichemical) 
pulping processes. Emissions associated with onsite energy generation 
for mechanical pulping are reported under subpart C of Part 98 
(Stationary Combustion). Reporting the total annual production of air-
dried unbleached virgin chemical pulp provides a common pulp reporting 
basis regardless of production processes (e.g., bleaching, secondary 
fiber pulping, and paper making) that happen downstream of the virgin 
chemical pulping process where the subpart AA GHG emissions are 
generated.
    Mills with positive subpart AA emissions should always report a 
positive virgin chemical pulp production value. In the final amendments 
we removed the proposed requirement to report a positive (non-zero) 
value for pulp production because some mills may wish to report zero 
pulp production in conjunction with zero subpart AA emissions in years 
when they do not produce any virgin chemical pulp.
    We also examined the correlation between paper production and 
subpart AA emissions and agree that additional information would need 
to be collected for GHG emissions to be meaningfully normalized based 
on paper production. The tonnage of paper produced does not necessarily 
relate to the subpart AA GHG emissions generated in the chemical pulp 
mill. Paper is often produced using combinations of chemical pulp, non-
chemical pulp, and secondary (recycled) fiber that may be either 
purchased or produced onsite, along with clay fillers, on-machine 
coatings, and other additives that contribute to the metric tons of 
paper produced. Bleaching processes that occur between the pulp and 
paper production areas of integrated pulp mills result in a slight loss 
of virgin pulp tonnage, further reducing the correlation between 
chemical pulp mill emissions reported under subpart AA and paper 
production. Furthermore, the paper production data reported under 
subpart AA provides an incomplete picture of GHG emissions normalized 
per metric ton of paper produced because reporting of paper production 
is not required under Part 98 for mills that do not report under 
subpart AA, such as mechanical pulp mills and mills that manufacture 
paper from purchased pulp (e.g., paper-only mills that report under 
subpart C). For these reasons, we have eliminated reporting of paper 
production from subpart AA in the final amendments. The EPA may 
consider at a later date whether it is necessary to propose new 
reporting requirements under Part 98 that would allow for a refined 
normalization of GHG emissions per ton of paper produced for all types 
of pulp and paper mills.

O. Subpart BB--Silicon Carbide Production

    We are finalizing several revisions to subpart BB of Part 98 
(Silicon Carbide Production) as proposed. The more substantive 
corrections, clarifying, and other amendments to subpart BB of Part 98 
are discussed in this section. We are finalizing all of the minor 
corrections presented in the Table of 2013 Revisions as proposed.
    We are revising 40 CFR 98.282(a) to remove the requirement for 
silicon carbide production facilities to report CH4 
emissions from silicon carbide process units or furnaces. We are 
removing 40 CFR 98.283(d) to remove the CH4 calculation 
methodology. As discussed in the preamble to the proposed amendments 
(78 FR 19802, April 2, 2013), the EPA has determined that the 
requirement to report CH4 emissions is not necessary to 
understand the emissions profile of the industry.
    Reporters must continue to monitor and report CO2 
emissions from silicon carbide process units and production furnaces. 
We are revising 40 CFR 98.283 so that CO2 emissions are to 
be calculated and reported for all process units and furnaces combined. 
The final rule revises 40 CFR 98.283 for consistency with the reporting 
requirements of 40 CFR 98.286. These amendments are finalized as 
proposed. The EPA received no comments on the proposed changes.

P. Subpart DD--Electrical Transmission and Distribution Equipment Use

    We are finalizing two substantive corrections to subpart DD 
(Electrical Transmission and Distribution Equipment Use) as proposed. 
We are revising 40 CFR 98.304(c)(1) and (c)(2) to correct the accuracy 
and precision requirements for weighing cylinders from ``2 pounds of 
the scale's capacity'' to ``2 pounds of true weight''. The EPA received 
no comments objecting to the proposed changes.

Q. Subpart FF--Underground Coal Mines

    We are finalizing multiple amendments to subpart FF of Part 98 
(Underground Coal Mines) as proposed. The final amendments clarify 
certain provisions and equation terms, harmonize reporting 
requirements, and improve verification of annual GHG reports. The more 
substantive corrections, clarifying, and other amendments to subpart FF 
of Part 98 are discussed in this section. We are finalizing all of the 
minor corrections presented in the Table of 2013 Revisions as proposed.
    We are revising the terminology in subpart FF provisions in 40 CFR 
98.320(b), 40 CFR 98.322(b) and (d), 40 CFR 98.323(c), 40 CFR 98.324(b) 
and (c), and 40 CFR 98.326(r) as proposed to adopt terminology that 
more accurately reflects industry operation. Specifically, for 
ventilation systems, we have replaced the terminology ``wells'' with 
``ventilation system shafts'' or ``vent holes'', and for degasification 
systems, we have replaced the terminology ``shafts'' with ``gob gas 
vent holes''. We have also revised the term ``flaring'' to clarify that 
mine ventilation air is destroyed using a ventilation air methane (VAM) 
oxidizer.
    We are revising the reporting requirements of subpart FF as 
proposed to include additional data elements that will allow the EPA to 
verify the data submitted, perform a year to year comparison of the 
data, and assess the reasonableness of the data reported. The 
additional data elements are included in revised 40 CFR 98.326(h), (i), 
(j), (o), (r), and new requirement (t) include: The moisture correction 
factor used in the emissions equations, units of measure for the 
volumetric flow rates reported, method of determining the gas 
composition, the start date and close date of each well, shaft, or vent 
hole, and the number of days the well, shaft, or vent hole was in 
operation during the reporting year. We are also adding a requirement 
(40 CFR 98.326(t)) for a reporting mine to provide the

[[Page 71925]]

identification number assigned to it by the Mine Safety and Health 
Administration (MSHA). The reporting requirements have also been 
updated to harmonize with changes to the calculation methods as 
itemized in the Table of 2013 Revisions (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
2012-0934). These amendments are finalized as proposed.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ We are finalizing confidentiality determinations for the 
new and significantly revised data elements in 40 CFR 98.326. See 
Section V of this preamble for additional information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA received no comments to the proposed changes. However, one 
reporting requirement that was proposed to be added as 40 CFR 
98.326(t), the amount of CH4 routed to each destruction 
device, was subsequently discovered to be redundant with information 
already collected under the rule, namely, 40 CFR 98.326(c) quarterly 
CH4 destruction at each ventilation and degasification 
system destruction device or point of offsite transport. Therefore, the 
proposed requirement is no longer being added. Additionally, the new 
reporting requirement to provide the identification number assigned by 
MSHA is now numbered as 40 CFR 98.326(t), instead of 40 CFR 98.326(u) 
as it was proposed.

R. Subpart HH--Municipal Solid Waste Landfills

1. Summary of Final Amendments
    We are finalizing several amendments to 40 CFR Part 98, subpart HH 
(Municipal Solid Waste Landfills) to clarify equations and amend 
monitoring requirements to reduce burden for reporters, where 
appropriate. We are finalizing all of the minor corrections presented 
in the Table of 2013 Revisions as proposed (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2012-0934). We are finalizing amendments to the definition of the 
DOC term (degradable organic carbon) for Equation HH-1, as proposed, to 
indicate that the DOC values for a waste type must be selected from 
Table HH-1. We are also finalizing amendments, as proposed, to the 
definition of the term ``F'' in Equation HH-1 (fraction by volume of 
CH4 in the landfill gas) to specify that this term must be 
corrected to zero percent (0%) oxygen and finalizing amendments to the 
monitoring requirements at 40 CFR 98.344(e) to specify how to correct 
this term to zero percent (0%) oxygen.
    We are finalizing amendments, as proposed, to change the minimum 
CH4 concentration monitoring frequency in recovered landfill 
gas from weekly to monthly. We are retaining the requirement, as 
proposed, to have 14 days between monthly sampling events if only one 
sample is collected per calendar month.
    We are finalizing revisions to the definition of oxidation fraction 
in Equations HH-5, HH-6, HH-7, and HH-8 of subpart HH to refer to the 
oxidation fractions in Table HH-4 (although, as discussed below, we are 
revising Table HH-4 based on comments received). We are finalizing 
revisions to Equations HH-6, HH-7, and HH-8 to generalize these 
equations in the event that the landfill contains multiple landfill gas 
collection system measurement locations and/or multiple destruction 
devices. While we are finalizing amendments to nearly all of the terms 
for Equations HH-6, HH-7, and HH-8 as proposed, we are further revising 
the proposed definition fDest,n in Equations HH-6 and HH-8 
to delete the phrase ``. . . is destroyed in a back-up flare (or 
similar device) or if the gas . . .'' Since the revised equations 
explicitly consider on-site back-up control devices, it is no longer 
necessary to assume fDest = 1 when a back-up flare is used. 
We are also finalizing proposed revisions to the reporting requirements 
associated with fDest,n in 40 CFR 98.346(i)(5). As proposed, 
we are finalizing amendments to generalize the reporting requirements 
for each measurement location. Additionally, based on the revisions to 
fDest,n outlined above, we are replacing requirements to 
report operating hours for the ``primary'' and ``back-up'' destruction 
device and a single value of destruction efficiency with requirements 
to report the number of destruction devices and the operating hours and 
destruction efficiency for each device associated with a given 
measurement location. We are also finalizing amendments to 40 CFR 
98.346(i)(6) and 40 CFR 98.346(i)(7) to clarify that methane recovery 
calculated using Equation HH-4 is to be reported separately for each 
measurement location.\28\ We are finalizing amendments as proposed to 
revise ``in reporting years'' to ``in the reporting year'' in the first 
sentence in 40 CFR 98.345(c). We are also finalizing, as proposed, 
amendments to move the reporting elements pertaining to the methane 
correction factor (MCF) from paragraph (d)(1) to paragraph (e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ We are finalizing confidentiality determinations for the 
revised data elements in 40 CFR 98.346(i)(5), (i)(6), and (i)(7). 
See Section IV.A of this preamble for additional information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are finalizing numerous revisions to the proposed oxidation 
fractions in Table HH-4. First, we are specifying that the oxidation 
fractions based on methane flux are only applicable for the 2013 
reporting year and subsequent reporting years and that an oxidation 
fraction of 0.10 must be used for reporting years prior to 2013. We are 
also specifying that, for the 2013 reporting year and subsequent 
reporting years, owners or operators of landfills that do not have a 
soil cover of at least twenty-four inches in depth for a majority of 
the landfill area containing waste must use an oxidation fraction of 
0.10 and owners or operators of landfills that have a geomembrane cover 
with less than 12 inches of soil must use an oxidation fraction of 0.0. 
We are allowing owners or operators of landfills to use the default 
oxidation fraction of 0.10 (except for geomembane covers with less than 
12 inches of soil) without determining their methane flux rate in lieu 
of the new oxidation fractions based on methane flux rates. This limits 
any additional burden associated with determining the methane flux 
rates to only those owners or operators of landfills that elect to use 
the new methane flux-dependent oxidation fractions.
    While we are finalizing the methane flux-dependent oxidation 
fraction values as proposed, we are limiting to some extent, 
considering the public comments received, the landfills that can use 
these new methane flux-dependent oxidation fractions to those that have 
cover soils of 24 inches or more over a majority of the landfill area 
containing waste. Nearly all of the data upon which the new methane 
flux-dependent oxidation fractions were based were for landfills with 
soil covers over 30 inches in depth, so it is reasonable to limit the 
use of the new methane flux-dependent oxidation fractions to landfills 
with similar soil cover systems.
    We are revising the definition of the term GCH4 (modeled 
methane generation rate) in the footnote to Table HH-4 to indicate that 
the modeled methane generation rate is determined from Equation HH-1 of 
subpart HH or Equation TT-1 of subpart TT, as applicable, because Table 
HH-4 is referenced in subpart TT and owners or operators of industrial 
waste landfills must use Equation TT-1 rather than Equation HH-1 to 
determine the modeled methane generation rate.
    We are making one revision to subpart HH based on comments received 
on the expansion of applicability that will occur in the MSW Landfill 
sector due to the revision of the GWP for methane to the IPCC AR4 
value. Specifically, we are providing a very limited exclusion within 
40 CFR 98.340 for certain closed landfills that have not previously had 
to

[[Page 71926]]

report under subpart HH, but would newly be required to report starting 
in reporting year 2014 because the amended methane GWP causes them to 
exceed the 25,000 metric tons CO2e emissions threshold for 
the first time. We have added this exclusion to reduce the burden for 
these closed landfills, who would otherwise be required to estimate 
historical waste quantities and develop their first annual report. See 
Section II.R.2 of this preamble for additional information.
    Finally, the EPA received one comment on subpart HH on the need to 
revisit the k-value decay rates used in the first order decay model for 
wet landfills, although we did not propose to revise these values. 
Although we are not including the suggested revisions in this final 
rule, the EPA may consider these comments for inclusion in a future 
rulemaking. See the comment response document for subpart HH in Docket 
Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934 for additional information.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to the proposed amendments to subpart HH. See the comment 
response document for subpart HH in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934 
for a complete listing of all comments and responses related to subpart 
HH.
    Comment: Several commenters noted that the proposed revised 
definition of fDest,n for Equations HH-6 and HH-8 includes a 
special provision when gas is destroyed in a ``back-up flare (or 
similar device).'' The commenters stated that this distinction is an 
artifact of the original rule and is no longer necessary because the 
proposed revisions to HH-6 and HH-8 properly account for multiple 
control devices regardless of the amount of time any given control 
device operates during the year, or whether it is considered a primary 
or backup device. Therefore, the commenters recommended deleting the 
phase ``is destroyed in a back-up flare (or similar device) or if the 
gas'' from the definition of fDest,n.
    Response: We agree with the commenters. Because Equations HH-6 and 
HH-8 have been generalized to directly account for on-site back-up 
destruction devices, the default of 1 is no longer necessary in the 
definition of fDest,n for these devices. The phrase 
requested to be deleted has been removed from the definition of 
fDest,n in today's final rule. In addition, we found that 
the reporting requirements in 40 CFR 98.346(i)(5) still had reporting 
requirements for ``back-up'' destruction devices. We proposed to revise 
this paragraph to require reporting for each measurement location, but 
considering the public comments and the revised definition for 
fDest,n in these final amendments, we also find that the 
reporting requirements in 40 CFR 98.346(i)(5) for ``back-up destruction 
devices'' is confusing and obsolete. Therefore, based on our proposed 
revisions to Equations HH-6 and HH-8 and our proposed revisions to 40 
CFR 98.346(i)(5), considering these public comments, we are finalizing 
the reporting requirements related to fDest,n in the today's 
final rule as follows: ``If destruction occurs at the landfill 
facility, also report for each measurement location the number of 
destruction devices associated with that measurement location and the 
annual operating hours and the destruction efficiency (percent) for 
each destruction device associated with that measurement location.''
    In our review of the reporting requirements corresponding to the 
revisions to Equations HH-6 and HH-8 in response to these comments, we 
also found that, when there are multiple methane recovery measurement 
locations, the methane recovery should be reported for each measurement 
location. We consider that 40 CFR 98.343(b)(1) and (2) require use of 
Equation HH-4 separately for each monitoring location (e.g., 40 CFR 
98.343(b)(1) requires owners or operators of MSW landfills that have 
continuous monitoring systems to ``. . . use this monitoring system and 
calculate the quantity of CH4 recovered for destruction 
using Equation HH-4 of this section.''). It is also clear that the 
methane recovery and the fraction of hours the recovery system operated 
needs to be determined separately for each measurement location as 
these are separate inputs for Equations HH-6 and HH-8, as amended, when 
multiple measurement locations are used. For e-GGRT to perform the 
necessary calculations and to support verification of reported methane 
generation and emissions, the measurement location-specific recovery 
values need to be reported. Therefore, based on our review of the 
reporting requirements corresponding to the revisions to Equations HH-6 
and HH8 in response to these comments, we are also finalizing 
amendments to 40 CFR 98.346(i)(6) to specify that the annual quantity 
of recovered CH4 calculated using Equation HH-4 must be 
reported for each measurement location and to 40 CFR 98.346(i)(7) to 
specify that the annual operating hours of the gas collection system 
must be reported for each measurement location.
    Comment: Several commenters expressed support of the revisions to 
allow methane concentration measurements to be performed monthly rather 
than weekly; however, these commenters objected to the inclusion of the 
14 day interval between monthly samples (if only one sample is 
collected per calendar month). The commenters stated that the EPA's 
analysis of three years of data provided for 395 landfills showed that 
there is very little variability in methane concentration across either 
weekly or monthly measurements. Some of the commenters also stated that 
qualified personnel properly trained in instrument calibration, sample 
measurement, and documentation procedures must be used to collect the 
readings for QA purposes and the 14 day limitation significantly and 
unnecessarily complicates scheduling of required personnel. Finally, a 
commenter argued that, for destruction devices that operate only 
intermittently (a common occurrence), it may not be possible to take a 
monthly reading at least fourteen days apart due to the operating 
schedule of the device. For example, if a device only operates for 
several days at the end of one month and the beginning of the next 
month, it would be impossible to acquire a reading for each month at 
least 14 days apart. For these reasons, the commenters suggested that 
the proposed 14 day interval between monthly samples be deleted from 
the rule.
    Response: As described in the memo ``Review of Weekly Landfill Gas 
Volumetric Flow and Methane Concentration'' (dated October 18, 2012 in 
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934), our analysis concluded there was 
an increase in the uncertainty of the annual methane recovery estimate 
if the sampling frequency was reduced from weekly to monthly, but that 
the increase in the uncertainty was acceptable given the significant 
reduction in sampling and analysis costs. In our analysis, we used 
monthly data readings that were a minimum of four weeks apart. That is, 
the monthly analysis assumed the measurement readings were taken at 
discrete monthly intervals. If no intervening interval is included, one 
could collect one sample near midnight on the last day of the month and 
a second sample just after midnight (i.e., the morning on the first day 
of the month), which would effectively be equivalent to monitoring bi-
monthly. Further analysis of the same set of landfill data suggests the 
deletion of a minimum interval between monthly samples further 
increases the

[[Page 71927]]

uncertainty of the resulting recovery estimates without reducing costs 
for the landfill owner or operator (See ``Uncertainty of Monthly 
Landfill Gas Methane Concentration Measurements,'' June 7, 2013 in 
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934). Thus, while the variability in 
the methane composition may be limited, it is still somewhat variable 
and reducing the sampling frequency will increase the uncertainty of 
the methane recovery values. Without a significant corresponding 
reduction in burden, this increase in uncertainty cannot be justified.
    It is not clear how reducing the monitoring frequency to monthly 
with a minimum of a 14 day interval would be onerous for scheduling 
purposes given that the previous requirement was weekly monitoring with 
a minimum of 3 days between samples (note: the existing rule has a 
similar minimum 3 day interval between weekly samples). Based on the 
weekly data provided by the landfill representatives, it appears that 
most landfills were able to collect weekly measurement data and most 
recovery systems operated continuously. The weekly data also suggest 
that there are very few instances (one landfill, for two month 
interval) where calendar month sampling could be accomplished only 
during the last week of one month and the first week of this month. 
Based on the weekly monitoring data, there does not appear to be any 
issue with collecting monthly samples at least 14 days apart.
    We note that, like the previous weekly monitoring requirement, 
there are missing data procedures for assessing the composition of the 
landfill gas if no sample could be collected during the calendar month. 
We do note that there were some landfills that did not operate their 
collection system for an entire month. In this case, the methane 
concentration is not a critical parameter since any concentration times 
zero flow equals zero methane recovery.
    Because the fourteen day period between monthly measurements limits 
the uncertainty of the methane recovery value and with no real increase 
in the cost of compliance, we are finalizing this requirement as 
proposed.
    Comment: Several commenters supported the proposed provisions to 
determine oxidation fractions on a site-specific basis based on the 
methane flux rate. However, a few commenters indicated that the 
proposed higher oxidation fractions would result in erroneously low 
methane emissions. While many of the arguments regarding under-
predicting methane emissions focused on factors other than the 
oxidation fraction (i.e., the methane recovery factors and the decay 
rate constants, which were not issues opened in the proposed 
amendments), two commenters noted that oxidation only occurs in 
landfill covers that are comprised of soil with the necessary depth, 
porosity, temperature and microbial population to effect oxidation. 
These commenters noted that landfills with composite or geomembrane 
covers that do not have a soil cover or a sufficient soil cover will 
not have any surface oxidation. One commenter indicated that the tests 
upon which the revised factors are based were conducted primarily on 
systems with landfill gas collection systems and well-engineered cover 
systems so the data were not representative of typical landfills.
    One commenter noted that, in order to streamline the calculations 
and to use a consistent basis from year to year, the EPA should allow 
the reporter an option to continue to use an oxidation factor of 0.1.
    Response: We appreciate the support of commenters that agreed with 
the proposed provisions to determine oxidation fractions on a site-
specific basis based on the methane flux rate. We agree that the site-
specific oxidation fraction should improve the methane emission 
estimates for facilities with low methane flux rates and sufficient 
soil cover to effect oxidation. However, we also agree with the 
commenters who noted that oxidation must be predicated on the presence 
of sufficient soil cover. We reviewed the available data upon which the 
proposed oxidation fractions were based. Nearly all of the recent tests 
were conducted using distinct location measurement techniques (surface 
air, chamber or soil probe measurements) and all measurements were made 
in areas that had a soil cover system of 30 inches or more. While we 
would have preferred to have more ``full-plume'' tests, which would 
better characterize the oxidation fraction over the entire landfill 
area, the surface and flux chamber measurements are not biased provided 
the surface locations are randomly selected and a sufficient number of 
measurements are made. We expect that most landfills will have 
intermediate or final soil covers over most of the areas of the 
landfill that contain waste, so these tests are generally applicable to 
most landfills. However, Table HH-4, as proposed, contained no 
restrictions on the use of the new methane flux-dependent oxidation 
fractions so it is conceivable that landfills that predominately have a 
daily soil cover could use these oxidation fractions that were 
developed for landfills with a much deeper cover soil layer. Therefore, 
we have revised Table HH-4 to limit the applicability of the new 
methane flux-dependent oxidation fractions to owners or operators of 
landfills that have a soil cover of at least 24 inches in depth for a 
majority of the landfill containing waste. We are also adding a new 
oxidation fraction for landfills that have a geomembrane cover and less 
than 12 inches of cover soil. Starting with the 2013 reporting year, 
these landfills must use an oxidation fraction of zero.
    We agree that the oxidation study data are heavily weighted to 
landfills with gas collection systems, which is why we do not support 
the average oxidation fractions by soil type presented in the summary 
table of the SWICS addendum. We note that all but one of the average 
oxidation fractions by soil type presented in the summary table of the 
SWICS addendum are greater than the 0.35 oxidation fraction proposed 
for landfills with ``low flux rates'' and all of them are higher than 
the 0.25 oxidation fraction proposed for landfills with ``medium flux 
rates.'' By grouping the oxidation data into bins based on the methane 
flux rate (prior to any oxidation), we avoid the obvious bias in the 
average oxidation fractions as recommended in the SWICS addendum caused 
by the preponderance of studies conducted at landfills with gas 
collection systems. Although there are fewer measurements in the high 
methane flux range (i.e., greater the 70 grams methane per square meter 
per day) as compared to number of measurements in the other methane 
flux bins, there are a sufficient number of test runs in each bin to 
adequately characterize the average oxidation fraction for each bin. 
Therefore, we maintain that the oxidation fractions grouped into bins 
by methane flux rates provides the most accurate and unbiased means of 
estimating oxidation fractions for landfills based on the available 
data.
    Finally, we agree that for many landfills that do not have gas 
collection systems, the new oxidation fractions based on methane flux 
rates is not likely to significantly alter their predicted methane 
emissions compared to using the general oxidation fraction default of 
0.10. Therefore, we also include in Table HH-4 the option for any 
landfill owner of operator, except those of landfills with geomembrane 
covers with little cover soil, to simply use the default oxidation 
fraction of 0.10 without the need to calculate methane flux rates.
    Comment: One commenter requested that the EPA clarify in the final 
rule that the proposed revised oxidation factor

[[Page 71928]]

approach for calculating CH4 emissions be used for reporting 
years 2013 and forward, and not require facilities to revise emissions 
data from reporting years 2010-2012. Such retroactive revisions would 
be time-consuming and expensive while resulting in minimal changes to 
reported emissions.
    Response: As indicated in our response to similar comments on the 
general reporting requirements in Section III.B of this preamble, these 
final amendments do not require facility owners or operators to 
resubmit previous annual reports. In the case of the oxidation factor, 
this value only impacts the emissions for the current reporting year 
and subsequent reporting years. Landfill owners or operators will not 
be required to determine methane fluxes for previous annual reports and 
revise those reports if a different oxidation factor applies. We have 
revised Table HH-4 to clarify that an oxidation factor of 0.1 must be 
used for reports prior to the 2013 reporting year and that the new 
oxidation factors can only be used starting with the 2013 and later 
reporting years.
    Comment: One commenter noted that an expansion of applicability 
that will occur in the MSW Landfill sector due to the revision of the 
GWP for methane that would not occur in certain other sectors (e.g., 
subpart FF: Underground Coal Mines, subpart NN: Natural Gas) because 
those sectors' applicability threshold is not based on CO2e 
emissions. The commenter described requiring reporting from more very 
small landfills and requiring other very small closed landfills to 
continue reporting as costly and of limited policy relevance. The 
commenter further noted that the applicability determination for MSW 
Landfills is already based on the methane generation level, which was 
converted to tons CO2e so that emissions of CO2 
from stationary combustion sources are not considered in determining 
applicability under the rule.
    Given the increased cost and limited utility of these ``side 
effects'' of revising the GWPs, the commenter recommended that the EPA 
establish both a methane-based reporting threshold for subpart HH to 
replace the CO2e based reporting threshold and a methane-
based requirement for exiting the program. The commenter stated that 
changes are easily implemented by simply establishing a methane 
reporting threshold of 1190 metric tons/year or more and by adding new 
language to clarify off-ramp provisions for both the five-year exit 
threshold (1190 metric tons CH4) and the three-year exit 
threshold (714 tons metric tons CH4).
    The commenter noted that subpart HH facilities would still 
calculate and report methane as well as CO2e emissions for 
EPA inventory purposes but rule applicability and program exit 
provisions would be based upon methane emissions, not CO2e. 
According to the commenter, the proposed exit provisions do not 
consider ancillary subpart C anthropogenic emissions because MSW 
Landfills that meet the exit provisions are very small and primarily 
closed landfills, and they do not operate subpart C devices. The 
commenter described subpart C emissions as either non-existent or at 
such negligible amount that including these emissions would not prevent 
a subpart HH facility from exiting the program. Therefore, according to 
the commenter, subpart HH reporters would not exit the program 
prematurely due to exclusion of subpart C anthropogenic emissions.
    According to the commenter, a methane based reporting threshold 
would allow the Agency to avoid increasing the reporting program burden 
for the MSW landfill sector and the EPA staff. It would also prevent 
subjecting additional small and primarily closed landfills with 
negligible emissions to reporting requirements and new compliance 
costs. Existing reporters would not be delayed five additional years or 
more from exiting the reporting program. It also, according to the 
commenter, would allow the EPA to meet national and global inventory 
program commitments without needlessly affecting GHG MRR applicability.
    Response: As a programmatic issue, we have determined that the 
25,000 tons CO2e reporting threshold is a reasonable 
reporting threshold. Because MSW landfills are primarily a methane 
emissions source and the size of the landfill is expected to be 
correlated with its methane generation, we did establish applicability 
based on methane generation as calculated using the methods specified 
in subpart HH. However, the threshold value for reporting has always 
been the CO2e of that methane generation at a value of 
25,000 metric tons CO2e, which is consistent with most other 
subparts in Part 98.
    As noted in the preamble to the proposed rule, the revised GWP for 
methane more accurately reflects the estimated radiative forcing 
effects of methane emissions. We also noted in the preamble to the 
proposed rule that revisions to the GWP values would cause a number of 
facilities to have to newly report under subpart W: Petroleum and 
Natural Gas Systems, subpart II: Industrial Wastewater Treatment, and 
subpart TT: Industrial Waste Landfills, in addition to subpart HH. We 
specifically estimated the number of new reporters by subpart, the 
additional costs incurred for all new reporters in each subpart, and 
the additional emissions reported under the GHGRP for each subpart. 
Based on the cost estimates provided in the preamble to the proposed 
rule, the costs per ton of newly reported CO2e for MSW 
landfills were among the lowest of any of the subparts projected to 
have an increase in the number of reporters due to the revisions to GWP 
values in Table A-1. Therefore, we do not agree that the revision to 
the GWP for methane unduly burdens owner or operators of MSW landfills 
in general.
    We project most of the new reporters to be open landfills that 
reach the reporting threshold a year or two earlier than they would 
otherwise (without the revision in GWP values). We see no need to alter 
the reporting threshold for these open landfills. Emissions from open 
landfills generally increase every year, so the change in the GWP of 
methane may cause them to report one year earlier, but that is a small 
incremental burden over the facility's expected annual reports over the 
following years. We see advantages to open landfills reporting into the 
program earlier based on the revised GWP for both nationwide inventory 
purposes and policy matters. Therefore, we are not providing a blanket 
applicability change in terms of methane generation.
    We also do not find merit in the argument that the terms of the 
off-ramp provisions should be changed to methane emissions. Besides 
neglecting the stationary combustion source CO2 emissions, 
which may, as the commenter noted, be small, we find that the 
``additional years of reporting'' do not constitute a significant 
increase in burden. Landfills on the off-ramp provisions are expected 
to have no real monitoring requirements under subpart HH since waste is 
no longer received at the landfill and the gas collection system (if 
once present) will generally not be operated given the declining 
methane generation. Consequently, all of the data they would need to 
determine their subpart HH emissions will already be in the e-GGRT 
system. The e-GGRT system will automatically carry forward the 
historical waste disposal records and perform the necessary 
calculations. The landfill owner or operator will only need to review, 
verify, and submit the report. While the landfill may have to submit

[[Page 71929]]

a few additional annual reports, the additional burden incurred is 
minimal.
    On the other hand, there may be a limited number of small, older, 
closed landfills that have not previously had to report under subpart 
HH that would be required to newly report in 2014 by exceeding the 
25,000 metric tons CO2e emissions threshold for the first 
time solely due to the increase in the GWP of methane. We expect very 
few small, older, closed landfills would have the specific 
characteristics to have to newly report solely due to the increase in 
the GWP of methane; however, for these closed landfills, it would be a 
substantial additional burden to estimate historical waste quantities 
and develop their first annual report. As these landfills are closed, 
they no longer have a source of revenue from waste disposal fees, and 
the burden of reporting would be greater for them than for reporters 
with active revenue. Furthermore, these closed landfills will have 
declining emissions in all future years since they are no longer 
receiving waste and additional methane is not being produced. The first 
consequence of these declining emissions is that these reporters would 
provide data for only a few years until they can exit the program 
because their emissions are below threshold levels for the required 
period of time. The second consequence is that it is extremely unlikely 
that the information collected from these closed landfills would be 
useful when considering future policy options. The minor incremental 
improvement to overall emission totals for this sector does not warrant 
the disproportionate burden that would imposed on these older, small, 
closed facilities for information that is not useful for policy 
purposes. Consequently, we consider it reasonable to provide a very 
limited exclusion within subpart HH to reduce the burden for these 
specific older, small, closed landfills. Specifically, we are 
finalizing an amendment to 40 CFR 98.340 to modify paragraph (a) to 
specify that the source category does not include MSW landfills that 
have not received waste on or after January 1, 2013, and that had 
CH4 generation, as determined using both Equation HH-5 and 
Equation HH-7 of this subpart, of less than 1,190 metric tons of 
CH4 in the 2013 reporting year, and that were not required 
to submit an annual report under any requirement of Part 98 in the 
reporting years prior to 2013.
    In conclusion, we maintain that the revised GWP values in Table A-1 
of Subpart A more accurately reflect the climate impacts of methane 
emissions and that the existing applicability threshold for MSW 
landfills in subpart A in terms of CO2e emissions is 
reasonable. We have adequately considered the impacts of the revisions 
of the GWP of methane on MSW landfills (as well as other subparts in 
Part 98) and have concluded that these impacts are reasonable. However, 
we are providing a specific exclusion for certain small, older, closed 
MSW landfills that did not previously have to report to eliminate the 
impacts of the revisions to the GWP of methane for these landfills. 
Finally, we are not making any revisions to off-ramp provisions for 
subpart HH as requested by the commenter.

S. Subpart LL--Suppliers of Coal-based Liquid Fuels

    We are finalizing multiple revisions to 40 CFR part 98, subpart LL 
(Suppliers of Coal-based Liquid Fuels). This section includes the more 
substantive corrections, clarifying, and other amendments to subpart 
LL. We are finalizing all of the minor corrections presented in the 
Table of 2013 Revisions as proposed (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2012-0934).
    As proposed, we are removing the requirements at 40 CFR 
98.386(a)(1), (a)(5), (a)(13), (b)(1), and (c)(1) for each facility, 
importer, and exporter to report the annual quantity of each product or 
natural gas liquid on the basis of the measurement method used. The EPA 
received no comments to the proposed changes.

T. Subpart MM--Suppliers of Petroleum Products

1. Summary of Final Amendments
    We are finalizing revisions to 40 CFR part 98, subpart MM 
(Suppliers of Petroleum Products) as proposed to clarify requirements 
and amend data reporting requirements to reduce burden for reporters. 
Based on a comment received, we are also removing the requirement to 
report a complete list of methods used to measure the annual quantities 
reported for each product or natural gas liquid. The more substantive 
corrections, clarifications, and other amendments to subpart MM are 
found here. Additional minor corrections, including changes to the 
final rule, are presented in the Table of 2013 Revisions (see Docket 
Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934).
    We are finalizing the amendments to clarify the equation term for 
``Producti'' at 40 CFR 98.393(a)(1) and (a)(2) to exclude 
those products that entered the refinery but are not reported under 40 
CFR 98.396(a)(2) as proposed.
    We are finalizing as proposed the harmonizing changes to 40 CFR 
98.394(b)(3) to make the equipment calibration requirements for 
petroleum products suppliers consistent with other Part 98 calibration 
requirements.
    We are removing as proposed the requirements of 40 CFR 
98.396(a)(1), (a)(5), (a)(13), (b)(1), and (c)(1) for each facility, 
importer, and exporter to report the annual quantity of each petroleum 
product or natural gas liquid on the basis of the measurement method 
used. We are also removing the requirements of 40 CFR 98.396(a)(4), 
(a)(8), (a)(15), (b)(4), and (c)(4) for each facility, importer, and 
exporter to report a complete list of methods used to measure the 
annual quantities reported for each product or natural gas liquid.
    We are eliminating as proposed the reporting requirement for 
individual batches of crude oil feedstocks. The reporting requirements 
for crude oil at 40 CFR 98.396(a)(20) are changed, as proposed, to 
require only the annual quantity of crude oil.
    We are eliminating the requirement to measure the API gravity and 
the sulfur content of each batch of crude oil at 40 CFR 98.394(d) as 
proposed. We are also removing, as proposed, the requirement at 40 CFR 
98.394(a)(1) that a standard method by a consensus-based standards 
organization be used to measure crude oil on site at a refinery, if 
such a method exists. Other associated changes to the rule to harmonize 
with this change include removing the definition of ``batch'' from 40 
CFR 98.398, removing the procedures for estimating missing data for 
determination of API gravity and sulfur content at 40 CFR 98.395(c), 
and the recordkeeping requirement for crude oil quantities at 40 CFR 
98.397(b).
    We are including, as proposed, the definitions of natural gas 
liquids (NGL) and bulk NGLs in the subpart MM definitions at 40 CFR 
98.398 to clarify the distinction between NGL and bulk NGL for 
reporting purposes under subpart MM. We are also clarifying, as 
proposed, the reporting requirements for bulk NGLs and NGLs. We are 
modifying, as proposed, the requirement at 40 CFR 98.396(a)(22) to 
specify that NGLs reported in 40 CFR 98.396(a)(2) should not be 
reported again in 40 CFR 98.396(a)(22).
    We are revising, as proposed, the default density and emission 
factors in Table MM-1 for propane, propylene, ethane, ethylene, 
isobutane, isobutylene, butane, and butylene. Please refer to the 
preamble to the proposed rule (78 FR 19802, April 2, 2013) for 
additional information regarding the amendments to subpart MM.

[[Page 71930]]

2. Summary of Comments and Responses
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to the proposed amendments to subpart MM. See the comment 
response document for subpart MM in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934 
for a complete listing of all comments and responses related to subpart 
MM. The majority of comments received on subpart MM supported the 
proposed revisions. A small number of comments were received requesting 
additional revisions to the reporting requirements that were not 
proposed. No comments were received opposing the proposed revisions.
    Comment: We received several comments supporting the EPA's proposed 
revision to eliminate reporting of product volumes by measurement 
method, but one commenter suggested that the requirement to report a 
list of methods used to measure the annual product quantities reported 
should also be eliminated as it is tangential to the GHG emissions 
data.
    Response: While the list of measurement methods would help the EPA 
assess the appropriateness of the standard methods and industry 
practices that individual reporters select, to further reduce the 
burden on reporters, the EPA incorporated the commenter's proposed 
changes because the EPA agrees that the list is tangential to the GHG 
emissions data when considered along with the other revisions to 
subpart MM that are being finalized. The EPA will not require that 
petroleum product suppliers report the standard method or industry 
standard practice used to measure product quantities that are reported 
to the EPA.

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

1. Summary of Final Amendments
    We are finalizing several amendments to 40 CFR part 98, subpart NN 
(Suppliers of Natural Gas and Natural Gas Liquids) to clarify reporting 
requirements and improve data quality, where appropriate. Additional 
minor corrections, including changes to the final rule, are presented 
in the Table of 2013 Revisions (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-
0934). We are finalizing, as proposed, the amendments to the definition 
of Local Distribution Companies (LDCs) in 40 CFR 98.400(b) to coincide 
with the definition of LDCs in 40 CFR 98.230(a)(8) (40 CFR part 98, 
subpart W) to clarify that for LDCs operating in multiple states, 
operations in each state are considered a separate LDC. We are also 
finalizing, as proposed, the revision to clarify that interstate and 
intrastate pipelines delivering natural gas directly to major 
industrial users or to farm taps upstream of the LDC inlet are not 
included in the definition of an LDC.
    We are finalizing, with revisions, the proposal to change the way 
LDCs report the annual volume of natural gas delivered to each large 
end-user registering supply equal to or greater than 460,000 thousand 
standard cubic feet (Mscf) during the calendar year. The EPA had 
previously proposed changing this requirement so that if an LDC knows 
that a group of meters serves one particular facility receiving a total 
of greater than 460,000 Mscf during the year, the LDC would be required 
to report those deliveries per facility rather than per meter. The EPA 
received two comments that the proposed amendments did not make it 
clear how LDCs could ensure compliance, specifically, commenters stated 
it was unclear how much research an LDC should do in order to back up 
an assertion that the LDC does not ``know'' whether a series of meters 
serves one large facility. The commenters suggested that the EPA modify 
the proposed text to state that the reporting be done at the facility 
level only if the LDC ``knows based on readily available information 
that multiple meters serve one end user facility.'' As a result of this 
comment, the EPA has finalized language to state that an LDC must 
report the large end-user in this manner if the LDC ``knows based on 
readily available information in the LDCs possession'' that multiple 
meters serve an individual end-user facility to clarify our intention 
that new research is not required on the behalf of the LDC to determine 
which meters serve which facilities. Further, the commenters expressed 
concern that the terms ``customer'' and ``end user facility'' were used 
inconsistently in the rule and preamble and suggested the term ``end 
user facility'' be used throughout to improve clarity. As a result of 
this comment, the EPA has modified the final rule to consistently refer 
to such end-users as ``large end-users.'' In 98.404(b)(2)(i), the EPA 
has defined a large end-user as any facility receiving greater than or 
equal to 460,000 Mscf of natural gas per year, or, if the LDC does not 
know the total quantity of gas delivered to the end-user facility based 
on readily available information in the LDC's possession, any single 
meter at an end-user facility to which the LDC delivers equal to or 
greater than 460,000 Mscf per year. The term ``large end-user'' was 
added throughout the regulatory text to replace ``end-user'', as 
appropriate, and references to this definition were inserted as 
appropriate to reduce confusion and increase consistency and clarity.
    We are finalizing, as proposed, the revision to replace Equation 
NN-5 with two Equations, NN-5a and NN-5b, to allow LDCs to more 
accurately calculate the amount of carbon dioxide associated with the 
net change in natural gas stored on system and natural gas received by 
the LDC that bypassed the city gate. The EPA is also finalizing the 
harmonizing revisions to Equation NN-6 that incorporates the two 
proposed NN-5 equations.
    Additionally, we are finalizing, as proposed, the revision to 
require natural gas liquids fractionators to report the quantity of o-
grade, y-grade, and other types of bulk NGLs received and the quantity 
of these NGLs not fractionated, but supplied downstream.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ We are finalizing confidentiality determinations for 
significantly revised data element in 40 CFR 98.406. See Section V 
of this preamble for additional information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, we are finalizing, as proposed, the changes to the default 
HHV and emission factors in Table NN-1 and NN-2 for LPGs including 
propane, ethane, isobutane and butane, as well as the factors for 
natural gas.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to the proposed amendments to subpart NN. See the comment 
response document for subpart NN in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934 
for a complete listing of all comments and responses related to subpart 
NN.
    Comment: The EPA received four comment letters regarding the 
proposed amendments to subpart NN. While most of the comments supported 
the EPA's amendments, we received two comment letters expressing 
concern that the proposed amendments to the LDC reporting requirements 
for natural gas supplied to large end-users (i.e., those meters or 
facilities receiving more than 460,000 Mscf per year) are confusing and 
lacked clarity. The commenters noted the phrases ``customer meter'' and 
``end-user facility'' were used inconsistently throughout the rule. 
They believe this inconsistency could be confusing to reporters. To 
improve clarity, the commenters recommended the term ``end-user 
facility'' be used throughout the rule. The commenters are also 
concerned the proposed phrase ``if known'' in 40 CFR 98.406(b)(7) does 
not provide sufficient clarity regarding

[[Page 71931]]

the level of research required by LDCs to determine which meters supply 
natural gas to each large end-user facility. They noted that LDCs often 
send one bill to a company's main office reflecting gas usage for all 
facilities across a state and in such cases gas usage from one 
individual facility may not be readily known. The commenter suggested 
the phrase ``if known'' be replaced with ``if known based on readily 
available information.'' One commenter suggested the ``end-user'' be 
defined as ``a single service address'' to avoid confusion with the EIA 
Form 176 reporting of natural gas supply by end-user categories. 
Finally, one commenter was concerned about the reporting burden 
associated with determining total fuel deliveries to facilities with 
many meters, especially those facilities with many meters that receive 
only a small quantity of gas (less than 50,000 Mscf). The commenter 
suggested that only meters which record an annual total of 50,000 Mscf 
or greater per year be included in the total reported deliveries to a 
large end-user facility.
    Response: In the existing rule, LDCs are required to report natural 
gas delivered to individual meters that received equal to or more than 
460,000 Mscf per calendar year. Under Part 98, the CO2 
quantity reported by LDCs associated with deliveries to large end-use 
meters (i.e., the value calculated using Equation NN-4) has been 
collected because the large end-user facilities that receive gas 
through these meters report GHG emissions from natural gas combustion 
to the EPA in other subparts of Part 98. With the information collected 
in Equation NN-4, the EPA has been able to quantify a significant 
portion of the total CO2 that is double reported by LDCs and 
large end-user facilities. This has helped the EPA to estimate the 
total national CO2 emissions from natural gas combustion 
reported under the GHGRP.
    As we noted in the preamble to the proposed amendments, this 
approach did not always address the overlap in CO2 reported 
by LDCs in subpart NN and large end-user facilities subject to other 
subparts of Part 98 (for example subpart C or D). For example, in 
situations where 460,000 Mscf or more of natural gas is supplied to a 
single large end-user facility in a calendar year by a series or group 
of meters, where each individual meter receives less than 460,000 Mscf, 
the CO2 associated with this gas was not reported under 
subpart NN, and the quantity of overlap could not be determined. To 
improve the quality of the national CO2 emissions estimate 
for natural gas combustion, we are finalizing the proposed amendments 
requiring LDCs to report the quantity of natural gas delivered to each 
facility known by the LDC to receive equal to or greater than the 
460,000 Mscf per year, with some clarifications. The EPA is not 
requiring LDCs undertake any new research to determine which meters 
supply gas to each large end-user facility. Rather LDCs should use the 
information already available to them in their existing records (e.g., 
meter addresses or billing records). If an LDC has insufficient 
information to make the determination, they may continue to report data 
for each gas meter that receives equal to or greater than 460,000 Mscf 
per year. To clarify our intention, we agreed with the commenter and 
have amended 40 CFR 98.403(b)(2)(i) to define the term ``large end-
user'' as either any large end-user facility receiving greater than or 
equal to 460,000 Mscf of natural gas per year or a single meter 
receiving equal to or greater than 460,000 Mscf per year when the LDC 
does not know the total quantity of gas delivered to the facility, 
based on readily available information in the LDC's possession. We 
revised 40 CFR 98.404 and 40 CFR 98.406 to make those sections 
consistent with the changes made in 40 CFR 98.403(b)(2).
    The EPA considered using the term ``single service address'' to 
refer to facilities that receive equal to or greater than 460,000 Mscf 
per year as suggested by one commenter as a means of reducing potential 
confusion between natural gas supply data reported under 40 CFR 
98.406(b)(7) for individual large end-users (either a facility or 
meter) and natural gas reported under 40 CFR 98.403(b)(13) for the EIA 
end-use categories. However, we decided not to make this change since 
the new definition added to 40 CFR 98.403(b)(2)(i) should reduce the 
likelihood that reporters will confuse the two reporting requirements. 
Also, the term ``facility'' is already defined in Part 98 and used 
consistently throughout the rule. We were concerned that introducing a 
new term to refer to a facility could result in greater confusion as 
the suggested change would make subpart NN inconsistent with other 
subparts of the rule.
    The EPA disagrees with the commenter's recommendation that LDCs be 
required to report only meters with fuel usage of 50,000 Mscf or 
greater for large end-user facilities that exceed the reporting 
threshold in aggregate and have multiple meters. We disagree with this 
recommendation for several reasons. First, the approach suggested by 
the commenter would compromise the quality and usefulness of the data 
collected. The EPA's intention in collecting these data is to quantify 
the overlap in reported CO2 between subpart NN and other 
subparts in estimating total U.S. CO2 emissions from natural 
gas combustion. Under the subparts applicable to large end-user 
facilities, direct emitters report emissions for all combustion units 
and processes located at their facility, regardless of the quantity of 
emissions from the unit or process. Therefore, if LDCs did not report 
the CO2 quantity associated with gas delivered through small 
meters, the overlap could not be properly determined. While the impact 
on the CO2 quantity for an individual facility would be 
small, the impact on the quality of national CO2 estimates 
would be more significant and would be difficult to quantify. Since 
Part 98 requires direct emitters to report all emissions from 
combustion sources, allowing LDCs to report natural gas supplied to 
some but not all meters located at large end-user facilities would 
result in an overestimate of national CO2 emissions from 
natural gas combustion. It is EPA's intention to quantify national 
CO2 emissions from natural gas combustion as accurately as 
possible.
    Second, under the suggested approach, the reporter would be 
required to determine the quantity of natural gas flowing through each 
of these meters to assess whether it exceeds the 50,000 Mscf threshold, 
which means the quantity of gas flowing through each meter would still 
need to be determined under the commenter's proposed approach as it is 
under the final rule. The methodology used to calculate the 
CO2 quantity associated with this gas is simple, once the 
quantity of fuel has been determined (fuel quantity times an emission 
factor and heating rate, which may be default factors). Therefore, the 
EPA has determined that there is not a significant burden associated 
with calculating and reporting this CO2 quantity.
    Finally, the suggested approach to require that only gas delivered 
through a meter with a fuel usage of 50,000 Mscf per year or greater be 
reported would result in additional reporting burden for many LDCs. 
This is the case, for example, when the total quantity of gas delivered 
to a customer is known based on billing records or other information. 
Requiring LDCs to evaluate, and subtract out, the usage for each 
individual meter that supplies a single large end-user facility with 
less than 50,000 Mscf per year could be time consuming. This evaluation 
would need to be completed for each reporting year, since the gas 
delivered through a particular meter may be above the threshold one 
year and below the

[[Page 71932]]

threshold the next year. We anticipate that the process of evaluating 
and subtracting out the gas supplied to smaller meters, as recommended 
by the commenter, would require considerable additional work for LDCs.

V. Subpart PP--Suppliers of Carbon Dioxide

    We are finalizing three substantive amendments to subpart PP of 
Part 98 (Suppliers of Carbon Dioxide) as proposed. One additional minor 
correction, discussed in the Table of Revisions (see Docket Id. No. 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934), is finalized as proposed.
    We are amending 40 CFR 98.423(a)(3)(i) as proposed to clarify that 
facilities with CO2 production wells that extract or produce 
a CO2 stream may use Equation PP-3a to aggregate the total 
annual mass of CO2 from multiple extracted streams. This 
clarifying change increases the reporting flexibility for facilities 
with CO2 production wells by allowing them to aggregate 
CO2 emissions from multiple CO2 streams.
    We are also amending the reporting requirements of 40 CFR 
98.426(f)(10) and (f)(11) as proposed, which require reporting the 
aggregated annual CO2 quantities transferred to enhanced oil 
and natural gas recovery or geologic sequestration. The final rule 
amendments clarify that these end use application options reflect 
injection of CO2 to geologic sequestration or enhanced oil 
recovery as covered by 40 CFR part 98, subparts RR and UU, 
respectively. The EPA received no comments on the proposed changes.

W. Subpart QQ--Importers and Exporters of Fluorinated Greenhouse Gases 
Contained in Pre-Charged Equipment or Closed-Cell Foams

1. Summary of Final Amendments
    The EPA is finalizing multiple revisions to subpart QQ (Importers 
and Exporters of Fluorinated Greenhouse Gases Contained in Pre-Charged 
Equipment or Closed-Cell Foams) as proposed. The more substantive 
corrections, clarifying, and other amendments to subpart QQ are 
discussed in this section. We are finalizing all of the minor 
corrections presented in the Table of 2013 Revisions as proposed (see 
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934).
    We are correcting the equation term ``St'' in Equations 
QQ-1 and QQ-2 as proposed to clarify that the input may be mass (charge 
per piece of equipment) or density (charge per cubic foot of foam, kg 
per cubic foot). We are amending an example within the definition of 
``closed-cell foam'' at 40 CFR 98.438 as proposed. We are replacing the 
term ``appliance'' with the term ``equipment'' at 40 CFR 98.436(a)(3), 
(a)(4), (a)(6)(ii), (a)(6)(iii), (b)(3), (b)(4), (b)(6)(ii), and 
(b)(6)(iii). We are revising the reporting requirements for 40 CFR 
98.436(a)(6)(iii) and (b)(6)(iii) as proposed to match the reported 
data element to the units required to be reported. The revision is a 
change from ``mass in CO2e'' to ``density in 
CO2e.'' We are amending the definition of ``pre-charged 
electrical equipment component'' at 40 CFR 98.438 as proposed.
    Finally, we are removing the following reporting requirements to 
alleviate burden on reporters as proposed: 40 CFR 98.436(a)(5), 
(a)(6)(iv), (b)(5), and (b)(6)(iv). Please refer to the preamble to the 
proposed rule (78 FR 19802, April 2, 2013) for additional information 
regarding the amendments. The EPA received no comments opposing the 
proposed changes to subpart QQ.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses
    See the comment response document in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2012-0934 for a complete listing of all comments and responses related 
to subpart QQ. The EPA did not receive any significant comments on the 
proposed changes and there are no changes to the rule based on these 
comments.

X. Subpart RR--Geologic Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide

    We are finalizing corrections to subpart RR of Part 98 (Geologic 
Sequestration of Carbon dioxide). The more substantive corrections, 
clarifying, and other amendments to subpart RR are discussed in this 
section. We are finalizing all of the minor corrections presented in 
the Table of 2013 Revisions as proposed (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2012-0934).
    As proposed, we are adding a requirement for facilities to report 
the standard or method used to calculate the mass or volume of contents 
in containers that is redelivered to another facility without being 
injected into the well.\30\ The EPA received no comments on the 
proposed changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ The EPA is also finalizing a data category and 
confidentiality determination for this data element. See the 
Confidentiality Determinations Memorandum, ``Final data category 
assignments and confidentiality determinations for (Docket Id. No. 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Y. Subpart SS--Electrical Equipment Manufacture or Refurbishment

    We are finalizing clarifying amendments and other corrections to 
subpart SS of Part 98 (Electrical Equipment Manufacture or 
Refurbishment). The more substantive corrections, clarifying, and other 
amendments to subpart SS are discussed in this section. We are 
finalizing all of the minor corrections presented in the Table of 2013 
Revisions as proposed (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934).
    We are harmonizing 40 CFR 98.453(d) and 40 CFR 98.453(h) as 
proposed to clarify the options available to estimate the mass of 
SF6 and PFCs disbursed to customers in new equipment. The 
final rule corrects inconsistencies between paragraphs so that all 
options are clearly identified as available.
    We are adding text to 40 CFR 98.453(d) to include the options to 
use the nameplate capacity of the equipment by itself and to use the 
nameplate capacity along with a calculation of the partial shipping 
charge. We are also revising 40 CFR 98.453(h) to clarify that these 
calculation requirements only apply where reporters choose to estimate 
the mass of SF6 or PFCs disbursed to customers in new 
equipment using the nameplate capacity of the equipment, either by 
itself or together with a calculation of the partial shipping charge. 
These amendments are finalized as proposed. The EPA received no 
comments on the proposed changes.

Z. Subpart TT--Industrial Waste Landfills

1. Summary of Final Amendments
    We are finalizing several amendments to 40 CFR part 98, subpart TT 
to clarify and correct calculation methods, provide additional 
flexibility for certain monitoring requirements, and clarify reporting 
requirements. We are finalizing, as proposed, the minor corrections 
discussed in the Table of 2013 Revisions (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2012-0934). We are finalizing amendments, as proposed, to revise 
the definition of the term ``DOCF'' in Equation TT-1 when a 
60-day anaerobic biodegradation test is used as well as revisions to 
Equation TT-7, which is used to determine a waste stream-specific DOC 
value when a facility performs a 60-day anaerobic biodegradation test.
    We are finalizing revisions to 40 CFR 98.464(b) and (c) to broaden 
the provisions to determine volatile solids concentration for 
historically managed waste streams. The revisions to 40 CFR

[[Page 71933]]

98.464(b) are being finalized as proposed. The revisions to 40 CFR 
98.464(c) are being finalized as proposed except that we are deleting 
the proposed phrase ``but was not received during the first reporting 
year'' to broaden the applicability of these provisions in 
consideration of the public comments received.
    We are finalizing amendments to 40 CFR 98.466(b)(1), as proposed, 
to clarify that waste quantities for inert waste steams must be 
reported. We are also finalizing amendments to the reporting 
requirements specific to Equations TT-4a and TT-4b in 40 CFR 
98.466(c)(4), as proposed.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ We are finalizing confidentiality determinations for the 
significantly revised data elements in 40 CFR 98.466. See Section V 
of this preamble for additional information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are finalizing amendments, as proposed, to revise the oxidation 
fraction default value (``OX'') in Equation TT-6 to reference the 
default values in Table HH-4; however, there are a number of revisions 
to Table HH-4 from the proposed table upon consideration of the public 
comments received. These revisions include limiting the new oxidation 
factors to landfills with soil covers of at least 24 inches for a 
majority of the landfill area containing waste, allowing the continued 
use of the 0.10 default oxidation factor, and clarifying that the 
modeled methane generation term for facilities subject to subpart TT is 
the result from Equation TT-1, not Equation HH-1. Please see Section 
II.R of this preamble for more details regarding these revisions.
    We are finalizing amendments, as proposed to Table TT-1 of subpart 
TT of Part 98 to include an ``industrial sludge category'' and to 
clarify certain industry default DOC values were applicable to wastes 
``other than industrial sludge.'' Based on public comments received, we 
are adding a definition of ``industrial sludge'' to 40 CFR 98.468 to 
clarify what waste streams are included in this waste category.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses
    Several comments were received from industrial waste landfill 
owners or operators regarding the proposed oxidation fractions assigned 
by methane flux rates in Table HH-3. These comments and responses are 
included in Section II.R. of this preamble. The significant comments 
and responses related to other proposed amendments to subpart TT are 
summarized in this section. See the comment response document in Docket 
Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934 for a complete listing of all comments and 
responses related to subpart TT.
    Comment: A commenter noted that the original subpart TT regulations 
allowed facilities to develop a DOC for use when estimating emissions 
from historic waste deposits. According to the commenter, it appeared 
that once such a DOC was developed, the same DOC was required to be 
used for these historic deposits in all future reports under the 
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule, even if better information became 
available. The commenter pointed to 40 CFR 98.463(a)(3), particularly 
the passage: ``The historical values for DOC or DOCx must be developed 
only for the first annual report required for the industrial waste 
landfill; and used for all subsequent annual reports (e.g., if DOC for 
year x = 1990 was determined to be 0.15 in the first reporting year, 
you must use 0.15 for the 1990 DOC value for all subsequent annual 
reports).'' The commenter stated that this was not reasonable since 
facilities had relatively little time to develop such historical DOCs, 
following the EPA's protocol, for the first required reporting of 
landfill methane emissions under a new reporting scheme and procedures. 
Making those initial determinations unchangeable, the commenter noted, 
would not make sense when the EPA is revising DOCs applicable to 
various wastes landfilled in the forest products industry.
    The commenter further asserted that this interpretation that the 
historical DOC that the facility first chose is fixed for all time 
appears to be at odds with 40 CFR98.3(h), which requires a facility to 
submit a revised report if the facility becomes aware of a substantive 
error in the prior report--which presumably could include an error in 
the DOC applied to historical deposits in the landfill. The commenter 
pointed to a response to a question from the EPA e-GGRT Help Desk, 
which indicated that a facility could recalculate and resubmit an 
annual GHG report if it determined that there is a more accurate method 
for estimating emissions, which could include a more accurate DOC than 
what was used in the past.
    Response: The requirements in 40 CFR 98.463(a) to determine the 
historical waste quantities and DOC values for the first annual report 
and to use those values for all subsequent annual reports is based on 
the need to have a single, consistent waste disposal timeline across 
annual reports. The requirement was also intended to make it clear that 
owners or operators of landfills did not have to recalculate an average 
DOC value determined according to the provisions in 40 CFR 
98.463(a)(3)(iv) if additional measurements are made for subsequent 
reporting years. The EPA did not intend, however, to prevent landfill 
owners and operators from correcting known errors or inaccuracies in 
the historical waste disposal quantities or DOC values. For example, if 
DOC values are determined using the anaerobic degradation method for 
the first time in the 2013 reporting year and that determination 
indicates that the historical DOC values used are in error, we do not 
interpret the language in 40 CFR 98.463(a)(3) to prevent correction of 
these historical DOC values. We note that the language in 40 CFR 
98.463(a)(2) and (3) specifically uses the phrase ``for the first 
annual report'' and does not require that the measurements be made in 
the ``first reporting year.'' That is, we interpret the language used 
in 40 CFR 98.463(a)(2) and (3) to require a consistent historical time 
series for waste quantities and DOC values be used in all annual 
reports. Revisions to the historical waste quantities and DOC values 
are permissible, but the entire time series of annual reports must be 
revised and resubmitted so that they are consistent with the revised 
``first annual report.''
    However, we do not agree that the proposed language in 40 CFR 
98.464(c) effectively limits the applicability of the methods to 
determine historical DOC values to waste streams that were not received 
``during the first reporting year.'' Although this provision was 
specifically added to address comments that some waste streams that 
were historically managed in the landfill were not generated during the 
first reporting year, it is unnecessary to limit the use of these 
methods to only waste streams that were not received in the first 
reporting year. Specifically, we acknowledge that the anaerobic test 
method was not included in subpart TT until late 2011, so that this 
method could not be used to establish waste stream-specific DOC values 
for the first annual report. We did not intend to limit the use of the 
anaerobic test method to only those streams that were not received 
during the first reporting year. Therefore, we are revising the 
proposed language at 40 CFR 98.464(c) to delete the phrase ``but was 
not received during the first reporting year'' to remove this 
restriction. Therefore, facilities can use test data from more recent 
years to revise the historical waste records provided that all annual 
reports are revised to use the same historical waste records. However, 
we also clarify, per our original intent, that

[[Page 71934]]

it is not necessary to revise these historical DOC values (and all 
historical annual reports) each year new DOC measurements are made. 
Thus, the owner or operator can choose to use ``current reporting 
year'' DOC measurement values only for the current reporting year. 
Alternatively, the owner or operator can use the new information to 
revise the historical waste values, but then they must revise and 
resubmit all previous annual reports so that the historical waste 
records for all annual reports are consistent with the records used in 
the ``first annual report.''
    Comment: A commenter noted that they have several waste streams 
that have DOC values more similar to the new default for industrial 
sludge than the defaults for waste streams ``(other than sludge).'' The 
commenter stated that the approach to DOCs that EPA has proposed would 
therefore continue to overstate substantially the GHG emissions from 
industrial waste landfills. The commenter suggested that the EPA either 
add more detailed DOC waste stream defaults to Table TT-1 or clarify 
that the term ``industrial sludge'' (which is undefined in the proposed 
rule) is intended to encompass materials that meet the common, 
dictionary meaning of ``sludge'' (e.g., ``thick, soft, wet mud or a 
similar viscous mixture of liquid and solid components, especially the 
product of an industrial or refining process''), as well as the meaning 
the EPA often gives to ``sludge,'' i.e. residue removed from wastewater 
treatment or air pollution control equipment. This would then allow 
industrial waste landfill owners or operators to apply the ``industrial 
sludge'' DOC to a wider array of waste streams.
    Response: With respect to adding more detailed waste stream-
specific DOC defaults to Table TT-1, we note that industrial waste 
landfill owners and operators may elect to determine a waste stream 
specific DOC value specific for their operations. We included in 
subpart TT a series of simple and inexpensive tests by which landfill 
owners and operators may elect to develop more accurate DOC values, as 
well as a more detailed anaerobic degradation tests if even more 
accurate values are desired. Landfill owners or operators that have a 
significant quantity of waste that is not well-characterized by the 
Table TT-1 defaults may elect to determine their own waste stream-
specific DOC value to use in their emission calculations. As noted in 
our previous response, if these site-specific values are determined for 
the first time in the 2013 reporting year, the landfill owner or 
operator can elect to (but is not required to) revise their historical 
DOC values and resubmit all previous annual reports based on the 
revised historical DOC values.
    The EPA is willing to consider expanding the list of default DOC 
values in Table TT-1 to include additional waste streams that are 
commonly found at industrial landfills. We are willing to work with the 
commenter and other stakeholders to gather further information to 
support the change requested and examine whether it should be included 
in a future rulemaking. However, the information provided by the 
commenter is new, contains only limited data, and was not part of the 
original proposal. Additional DOC test data for these waste streams 
from a larger and more representative sample of facilities would 
greatly inform such a decision.
    With respect to the lack of a definition of ``industrial sludge,'' 
we agree that clarity is needed. This category was specifically added 
to address concerns regarding inconsistencies with the DOC values for 
industrial waste in the 2006 IPCC Guidelines. The 2006 IPCC Guidelines 
appears to refer to ``sludge'' in reference to wastewater treatment 
sludges. As the ``industrial sludge'' waste category was specifically 
added to provide consistency with the 2006 IPCC Guidelines, we are 
adding a definition of ``industrial sludge'' to clarify that this term 
specifically refers to sludges collected in wastewater treatment 
systems or sludges from ``wet'' air control systems (e.g., wet 
scrubbers). Specifically, ``Industrial sludge means the residual, semi-
solid material left from industrial wastewater treatment processes or 
wet air pollution control devices (e.g., wet scrubbers). Industrial 
sludge includes underflow material collected in primary or secondary 
clarifiers, settling basins, or precipitation tanks as well as dredged 
materials from wastewater tanks or impoundments. Industrial sludge also 
includes the semi-solid material remaining after these materials are 
dewatered via a belt press, centrifuge, or similar dewatering 
process.'' The EPA believes that the definition suggested by the 
commenter is overly broad and could encompass materials not intended to 
be covered. As stated above, the EPA is willing to work with 
stakeholders to gather and analyze information needed to further refine 
the list of default DOC values in Table TT-1.

AA. Subpart UU--Injection of Carbon Dioxide

    We are finalizing amendments to 40 CFR part 98, subpart UU 
(Injection of Carbon Dioxide). The more substantive corrections, 
clarifying, and other amendments to subpart UU are discussed in this 
section. We are finalizing all of the minor corrections presented in 
the Table of 2013 Revisions as proposed (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2012-0934).
    The EPA is adding a requirement to subpart UU for a facility to 
report the purpose of CO2 injection (i.e., Research and 
Development (R&D) project exemption from subpart RR, enhanced oil or 
gas recovery, acid gas disposal, or some other reason).\32\ We are 
adding a requirement for facilities to report the standard or method 
used to calculate the parameters for CO2 received in 
containers.\33\ These amendments are finalized as proposed. The EPA 
received no comments on the proposed changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ The EPA is also finalizing category assignments and 
confidentiality determinations for new and revised data elements in 
the Confidentiality Determinations Memorandum(Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2012-0934).
    \33\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

BB. Other Technical Corrections

1. Summary of Final Amendments
    The EPA is finalizing minor corrections to subparts E, G, S, V, and 
II of Part 98 as proposed. The changes to these subparts are provided 
in the Table of Revisions for this rulemaking, available in Docket Id. 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934, 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), simple typo 
or error corrections, and removal of redundant text.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to minor corrections to subparts E, G, S, V, and II. The EPA 
received one comment related to subpart G. See the comment response 
document in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934.
    Comment: One commenter asked that the EPA revise subpart G to 
require the reporting of CO2 emitted directly to the 
atmosphere from the synthetic ammonia production process.
    The commenter noted that the CO2 captured during ammonia 
production and used to produce urea ``does not contribute to the 
CO2 emission estimates for ammonia production.'' The 
commenter reasoned that reporting the CO2 which is bound in 
urea, as required under subpart G, is inconsistent with other source 
categories covered by the rule, and is contrary to EPA's

[[Page 71935]]

methodology used in the Inventory. The commenter also noted that the 
structure of subpart G is similar to the structure of subpart P, but 
should be revised to be similar to the structure of subpart X. The 
commenter argued that sources in subpart G should be allowed to 
``reduce their CO2 reporting for CO2 in urea'' in 
the same way that sources in subpart X are allowed to ``reduce their 
carbon reporting for carbon in products.''
    Response: The EPA acknowledges the commenter's suggested revisions 
to the language in subpart G to require reporting only CO2 
that is emitted directly to the atmosphere from ammonia manufacturing 
rather than reporting CO2 that is bound in the urea that is 
produced from ammonia at some facilities. However, the comment falls 
outside of the scope of this rulemaking. The EPA had proposed 
clarifications to 40 CFR 98.76(b)(13) of subpart G but had not proposed 
any revisions to the calculation and monitoring methods described in 
the rule. Therefore, the EPA is not proposing any revisions in response 
to this comment at this time.
    However, the commenter has raised a consistency issue within Part 
98, that subpart G facilities currently are required to report 
CO2 that is bound in urea rather than emitted directly to 
the atmosphere, that merits evaluation and requires further analysis by 
the EPA. Prior to any modification of the rule language, the EPA will 
comprehensively assess the implications of such a change to the rule 
and propose any such revisions for public comment. This will ensure 
that the EPA is not introducing new or additional issues for facilities 
reporting under subpart G and other similar subparts, especially in the 
treatment of emissions that are collected onsite for other uses.

CC. Subpart I Correction

    Following signature of the final rule titled, ``Greenhouse Gas 
Reporting Program: Final Amendments and Confidentiality Determinations 
for Electronics Manufacturing'' [78 FR 68162] (``final subpart I 
rule''), the EPA identified an inconsistency between the preamble and 
final rule text. In the preamble, we stated that we were finalizing the 
requirements for the triennial technology report in section 98.96(y) as 
proposed, which was our intention. However, a sentence was 
inadvertently added to 98.96(y)(3)(i) in the final subpart I rule. In 
today's final rule, we are correcting this error to finalize 
98.96(y)(3)(i) as proposed in ``Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program: 
Proposed Amendments and Confidentiality Determinations for Subpart I'' 
[77 FR 63538].

III. Schedule for the Final Amendments and Republication of Emission 
Estimates for Prior Year Reports

A. Schedule for Final Amendments and Significant Comments

1. Summary of Final Amendments
    This section describes when the final amendments become effective 
for existing reporters and new facilities that are required to report 
as a result of the amendments to Table A-1. This section also discusses 
final amendments to subpart A for the use of best available monitoring 
methods (BAMM) by new reporters and the EPA's intentions for 
republishing emissions estimates for the 2010, 2011, and 2012 reporting 
years that reflect the changes in GWPs, based on the annual reports 
previously submitted by existing reporters.
    Existing Reporters. The final rule requires that existing GHGRP 
reporters begin using the updated GWPs in Table A-1 for their reporting 
year 2013 annual reports, which must be submitted by March 31, 2014, as 
proposed. We have determined that it is feasible for existing reporters 
to implement the final rule changes for the 2013 reporting year because 
these revisions do not require changes to the data collection and 
calculation methodologies in the existing rule. The EPA does not 
anticipate that the revised GWPs in Table A-1 will require any existing 
reporters to report under new subparts. The EPA received no comments 
identifying such a reporter. Such a reporter, if one exists, is not 
required to report for any past years under any subparts for which the 
reporter's emissions newly exceed a reporting threshold, and may use 
the BAMM provisions described below.
    Reporters subject to any subpart of Part 98 for the first time. We 
are finalizing the schedule for reporters that become newly subject to 
any subpart as proposed. The final rule requires reporters who are 
newly required to report under any subpart of Part 98 as a result of 
the changes to Table A-1 to begin collecting data on January 1, 2014 
for the 2014 reporting year. These reporters are required to submit 
their first reports, covering the 2014 reporting year, by March 31, 
2015. This schedule allows time for reporters to acquire, install, and 
calibrate any necessary monitoring equipment for the subparts to which 
they are subject in the 2014 reporting year.
    As proposed, we are adding provision 40 CFR 98.3(l) to subpart A to 
allow reporters who are required to newly report under any subpart 
solely as a result of the revised GWPs in Table A-1 to have the option 
of using BAMM from January 1, 2014 to March 31, 2014 for any parameter 
that cannot reasonably be measured according to the monitoring and QA/
QC requirements of a relevant subpart. We are allowing reporters to use 
BAMM during the January 1, 2014 to March 31, 2014 time period without 
submitting a formal request to the EPA. Reporters will also have the 
opportunity to request an extension for the use of BAMM beyond March 
31, 2014; those owners or operators must submit a request to the 
Administrator by January 31, 2014. The EPA does not anticipate allowing 
the use of BAMM for reporters subject to any subpart of Part 98 for the 
first time as a result of Table A-1 changes beyond December 31, 2014. 
The final schedule will allow five to six months after publication of 
this final rule to prepare for data collection while automatically 
being able to use BAMM, which is consistent with prior BAMM schedules. 
These provisions provide additional flexibility for new reporters and 
do not supersede existing subpart-specific BAMM requirements (e.g., the 
ability to request BAMM beyond 2011 for subpart W reporters (see 40 CFR 
98.1(b)). This additional time for new reporters to comply with the 
monitoring methods in Part 98 will allow many facilities to install the 
necessary monitoring equipment during other planned (or unplanned) 
process unit downtime, thus avoiding process interruptions.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses--Schedule
    Comment: One commenter recommended that the effective date for the 
revised and new GWPs be 12 months after the new values are finalized. 
The commenter stated that a one-year transition would allow reporters 
to address compliance issues related to GHG reporting, GHG permitting, 
and related projects that may arise due to the revised GWPs. The 
commenter stated that delaying implementation of GWPs for one year is 
reasonable because the changes will create compliance problems. The 
commenter asserted that it is not appropriate to apply the revised GWPs 
to 2013 emissions, given that the rulemaking affects who must report 
and the gases that must be reported. The commenter suggested that the 
new GWPs be used starting in reporting year 2014.
    Some commenters stated that companies and facilities will have to 
reprogram their data acquisition, analysis, and reporting systems to 
incorporate revised emission factors, revised emission estimation 
methods,

[[Page 71936]]

and revised reporting requirements. Commenters suggested that the final 
rule should defer the reporting deadline for 2013 emissions, suggesting 
increments of at least three or six months after the final revisions 
are published in the Federal Register. Commenters expressed concern 
about the time required to implement the final rule changes into 
existing reporting systems, particularly with respect to making changes 
to internal reporting systems to align with EPA's final extensible 
markup language (XML) schema or reporting forms.
    Response: Because the revised GWPs finalized in this rule are only 
for compounds that are already listed in Table A-1, reporters do not 
have to provide additional information for their reporting year 2013 
reports and there is no additional burden associated with calculating 
CO2e using the revised GWPs. In this final rule, we are not 
incorporating GWPs from the additional 26 compounds that we proposed to 
add to Table A-1 in the proposed 2013 Revisions Rule (see Section I.D. 
of this preamble). As discussed in the preamble to the 2013 Revisions 
proposal, the EPA intends to use data from the reporting year 2013 
GHGRP reports to supplement the top-down national estimate and develop 
the 2015 Inventory. Therefore, and because the final GWP changes add no 
burden to existing reporters, we are requiring existing GHGRP reporters 
to calculate GHG emissions and supply using the revised GWPs from AR4 
beginning with RY 2013 reports, which must be submitted by March 31, 
2014. New reporters who are required to report under Part 98 as a 
result of the changes to Table A-1 are required to begin collecting 
data on January 1, 2014 and must submit their first annual reports by 
March 31, 2015. We have included provisions in 40 CFR 98.3(l) to allow 
new reporters to have the option of using BAMM from January 1, 2014 to 
March 31, 2014, and to request extended BAMM beyond March 31, 2014, 
which will allow additional time for facilities to prepare for data 
collection. For concerns regarding the schedule and how this final rule 
impacts the Tailoring Rule and permitting programs, see Section 
II.A.2.b of this preamble.
    The EPA disagrees with the commenters' recommendations to extend 
the reporting deadline to accommodate changes to revised emission 
factors, revised emission estimation methods, and revised reporting 
requirements. We expect that the final rule changes for the 2013 
reporting year are feasible to implement prior to the March 31, 2014 
reporting deadline. These changes are consistent with the data 
collection and calculation methodologies in the existing rule, and 
primarily provide additional clarifications or flexibility regarding 
existing regulatory requirements and do not add new monitoring 
requirements. Therefore, they do not substantially affect the 
information that must be collected. Where calculation equations are 
modified, the changes clarify equation terms or simplify the 
calculations and do not require any additional data monitoring. Because 
reporters are not required to actually submit reporting year 2013 
reports until March 31, 2014, reporters will have adequate time to 
adjust their internal reporting programs to the finalized amendments 
before the reporting deadline.
    We note that many reporters use the e-GGRT Web-forms or 
spreadsheets developed by the EPA for preparing submitting their annual 
reports. The changes to the GWP values finalized in this rule will have 
minimal impact on these reporters since the CO2e values are 
automatically calculated for reporters using these reporting forms. 
While we agree that reporters using the XML format to report emissions 
will need to make revisions, we anticipate that there is sufficient 
time to make these changes and submit annual reports by the March 31, 
2014 deadline for reporting year 2013 data. The EPA will ensure that 
the e-GGRT reporting system is modified in a timely manner so as to not 
shorten the window for data reporting. The EPA acknowledges commenters' 
concerns regarding the XML reporting schema. The EPA will work to 
finalize the XML schema as early as possible to allow reporters 
adequate time to complete and upload their XML reports.
    Comment: One commenter recommends that the criteria in proposed 40 
CFR 93.3(l)(2)(ii) associated with BAMM requests be revised to take 
into consideration other considerations, such as safety, that may 
warrant the use of BAMM. The commenter requests that the EPA provide 
additional flexibility for use of BAMM under 40 CFR 98.3(l); ensure 
that BAMM is accessible beyond 2014; ensure that 40 CFR 93.3(l) 
criteria do not conflict with or supersede other subpart-specific BAMM 
provisions; and, if BAMM provisions in both subpart A and subpart W 
apply, clarify and harmonize requirements and schedules under the two 
subparts, especially for the first and second reporting years for new 
reporters. The commenter further requested that reporters who must 
comply with subpart W should have the option to use BAMM from January 
1, 2014 to June 30, 2014 without having to request EPA approval.
    Response: The BAMM provisions in 40 CFR 98.3(l) of subpart A allow 
new reporters subject to any subpart under Part 98 who would be 
required to report as a result of the proposed new or revised GWPs to 
have the option to use BAMM from January 1, 2014 to March 31, 2014 for 
any parameter that cannot reasonably be measured according to the 
monitoring and QA/QC requirements of the relevant subpart. These new 
reporters are allowed to use BAMM during the January 1, 2014 to March 
31, 2014 time period without making a formal request to the EPA. 
Reporters may also request an extension for the use of BAMM beyond 
March 31, 2014 by submitting a request to and receiving approval from 
the Administrator in accordance with the provisions in 40 CFR 
98.3(l)(2). We do not anticipate permitting the use of BAMM under the 
provisions of 40 CFR 98.3(l)(2) beyond December 31, 2014. Under the 
provisions of 40 CFR 98.3(l)(2), new reporters have more than a year to 
comply with the monitoring and QA/QC requirements of the applicable 
subparts. We consider this time period sufficient for facilities 
subject to the rule for the first time in 2014 to acquire, install, and 
calibrate monitoring equipment to meet the monitoring and QA/QC 
requirements of the rule. This time period is the same as was allowed 
for the initial reporting years.
    As noted by the commenter, the EPA promulgated additional subpart-
specific BAMM provisions for those subparts with unique or unusual 
situations that would make compliance with the monitoring and QA/QC 
procedures in those subparts challenging (e.g., subparts I, L, and W). 
These subpart-specific provisions allow for additional use of BAMM that 
is not provided under the General Provisions. Under these existing 
subpart-specific BAMM provisions, a reporter subject to the subpart may 
request approval to use BAMM for unique and extreme circumstances, such 
as safety concerns, technical infeasibility, or inconsistency with 
other local, State or Federal regulations. For example, pursuant to 40 
CFR 98.234(f)(8), a reporter subject to subpart W may use BAMM beyond 
2011 if it receives approval from the EPA. The new BAMM provisions in 
the General Provisions, 40 CFR 98.3(l) do not supersede any of these 
previously promulgated subpart-specific BAMM requirements (see 40 CFR 
98.1(b)). Since the deadline to submit subpart W BAMM requests covered 
in 40 CFR 98.234(f)(8) for the 2014 reporting year has passed, a 
facility that becomes newly subject to subpart W of Part 98

[[Page 71937]]

will be able to use BAMM without making a formal request between 
January 1, 2014 and March 31, 2014 under the provisions for new 
reporters in 40 CFR 98.3(l). This reporter may seek approval to use 
BAMM after this period (between April 1, 2014 and December 31, 2014) 
under 40 CFR 98.3(l) by submitting an extension request no later than 
60 days after the effective date of the final rule. However, for the 
2015 reporting year and forward, the new reporter should request 
approval to further continue using BAMM under subpart W by following 
the provisions covered in subpart W, 40 CFR 98.234(f)(8).
    We decided not to extend the time period during which BAMM may be 
used without seeking EPA approval despite the commenter's 
recommendation. Extending the deadline to June 30, 2014 as suggested by 
the commenter would likely result in some facilities taking longer to 
comply with the rule than is actually necessary. When facilities use 
BAMM, the quality of the reported emissions is impacted. Our aim in 
setting a March 31, 2014 deadline for using BAMM without prior EPA 
approval is to balance the EPA's need for high-quality data of known 
accuracy against the reporter's need for sufficient time to install, 
test, and calibrate new monitoring equipment. For most Part 98 
subparts, reporters should have little problem complying with the 
monitoring provisions by the March 31, 2014 deadline. By requiring 
reporters to apply for approval to use BAMM beyond March 31, 2014, the 
EPA will be able to ensure that BAMM is used only in those situations 
and times periods where its use is necessary.

B. Republication of Emissions Estimates for Prior Year Reports and 
Significant Comments

1. Summary of Republication of Emission Estimates for 2010, 2011, and 
2012
    In the proposed rule, we presented two options for the revision and 
republication of the CO2e estimates from annual reports for 
reporting years 2010, 2011, and 2012 using the proposed GWP values in 
Table A-1. Under Option 1, reporters who submitted annual reports for 
the reporting years 2010, 2011, and 2012 would be required to resubmit 
their prior year reports using the built-in calculation methods in the 
EPA's Electronic Greenhouse Gas Reporting Tool (e-GGRT) to convert 
reported quantities of GHGs to CO2e. Under Option 2, the EPA 
would independently recalculate revised CO2e emissions from 
the prior year reports for each facility using the revised GWPs in 
Table A-1. Under this scenario, each reporter would be able to view the 
EPA's revision of its emission or supply totals in previously submitted 
2010, 2011, and 2012 reports through e-GGRT. The reporter would not be 
able to comment on or change the revised estimate.
    The EPA received several comments on these proposed options. In 
general, commenters were concerned about the impact of revising totals 
from prior year reports that had previously been published. Commenters 
also expressed concern that facilities would be liable for changes to 
applicability under Part 98 or other EPA programs if the 
CO2e totals in their annual reports for 2010 through 2012 
were recalculated. Of those commenters that supported Option 2, several 
recommended that the EPA allow reporters to comment on the revised 
CO2e estimates prior to publication. These comments and the 
EPA's response to these comments are described in detail in Section 
III.B.2 of this preamble.
    After reviewing the comments submitted by stakeholders, the EPA is 
finalizing Option 2. Due to concerns raised by commenters, we are 
clarifying in this final rule that we do not intend to revise the 
annual reports submitted and certified by reporters for reporting years 
2010, 2011, and 2012 to reflect the revised GWPs finalized in this 
rulemaking. Prior year reports, using original GWPs, will remain 
publicly available. The EPA will also publish a version of the 
CO2e emissions and supply estimates for the reporting years 
2010, 2011, and 2012 using the revised GWPs in Table A-1. The EPA will 
clearly label the information as a product of EPA analysis, conducted 
to reflect a consistent time-series of carbon dioxide equivalent (i.e., 
emissions from the start of the program using the amended GWPs). Under 
this approach, the EPA's analysis will supplement, not revise or 
supersede, the previously published data. This will allow the Agency 
and public to view and compare trends in GHG data, beginning with the 
first year of GHGRP reporting, using consistent GWPs and without 
placing any additional burden on reporters. See Section III.B.2 for 
additional information on the EPA's revised approach.
2. Summary of Comments and Responses--Republication of Emission 
Estimates for Prior Year Reports
    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to EPA's proposal to publish recalculated emissions from 2010, 
2011, and 2012 reporting years. See the comment response document in 
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934 for a complete listing of all 
comments and responses related to emissions recalculations for prior 
reporting years.
    Comment: Several commenters requested that, if the EPA chooses to 
proceed with revising the CO2e emission estimates in annual 
reports for prior reporting years using the proposed revised GWP 
values, the EPA should pursue this through Option 2 as described in the 
proposal preamble (where the EPA would itself calculate the revised 
CO2e emissions), rather than mandating that reporters revise 
their prior reports. Many commenters preferred Option 2 because it 
would not place added burden on reporters to recalculate previously 
reported data. One commenter stated that Option 2 would enable the EPA 
to automatically revise CO2e emissions without the need for 
company review, pointing out that a programming modification would 
easily update emissions data universally without the need for responses 
from each individual facility and eliminate the time consuming reentry 
of data at the plant level. Another commenter insisted that the EPA 
must publish the revised estimates with a caveat explaining how the 
estimates were obtained and explaining that the emission values are not 
those submitted and certified by reporters.
    One commenter suggested the EPA revise the emissions data (as 
described in Option 2) and then present it in the published database as 
a parallel metric, leaving the certified facility-reported data 
unchanged. The commenter explained that this approach would ensure that 
a facility's reported emission data appropriately remains the official 
emission report for that facility while creating a ``continuous'' 
emission series dating to reporting year 2010. Another commenter 
suggested including the revised estimates on FLIGHT and listing both 
the previous and new GWPs. The commenter noted that addressing the 
emissions in this way would eliminate the need to revise even more 
reports if the EPA decides to update the GWPs again in the future.
    Many commenters opposed both options, asserting that retroactively 
revising data submitted in prior reports would undermine regulatory and 
business certainty. Commenters stated that it is inappropriate to 
require that emission estimates previously calculated in good faith be 
reassessed based on a revised rule. The commenters maintained that 
either option would create a substantial reporting burden without any 
real benefit. One commenter argued that

[[Page 71938]]

either option could have the unintended consequence of altering GHG 
mitigation strategies currently being deployed by facilities. Several 
commenters opposed recalculating prior reporting year emissions because 
these emissions are in the public domain, and the GWP values used to 
derive them were also used by sources for purposes of evaluating 
applicability of PSD and title V under the Tailoring Rule. Commenters 
argued that changing the emission totals that have already been 
published would also undermine transparency in the regulatory process 
and the public's confidence in the overall database.
    Commenters also disagreed that these revisions would allow for the 
comparison of emission data submitted for those reporting years with 
data submitted for reporting year 2013 and future reporting years. Some 
commenters indicated that the EPA has neglected to consider other 
proposed significant changes that can affect the overall emission 
estimates, citing, for example, the proposal to increase the cover 
methane oxidation rates at landfills from 10 percent to up to 35 
percent. The commenters contended that revised GHG emissions data will 
have little value if revisions address one change (e.g., GWP values) 
but not others (e.g., revised emission factors or oxidation rates). 
Another commenter emphasized the impacts of the retroactive application 
of changes on other EPA regulations as well as state programs such as 
California's AB 32 GHG reduction program. Commenters recommended that 
new GWPs, and in fact all revisions within the GHG Reporting Rule, be 
applied prospectively to future emission reports, contending that this 
is more logical from a legal, scientific, and workload perspective. 
Finally, no commenter supported Option 1.
    Response: After reviewing the comments submitted by stakeholders, 
we have selected Option 2 as the best means of meeting the need for GHG 
emissions data that accurately reflect the relative effect of each GHG. 
Option 2 will allow the EPA to provide a complete, consistent data set 
for prior years with the amended GWPs, including reports submitted for 
facilities and suppliers that have ceased operations, for comparison to 
data reported for 2013 and future years without increasing the burden 
on reporters or revising previously submitted reports.
    In response to the concerns raised by commenters, we emphasize that 
although we will recalculate the 2010 through 2012 CO2e 
values using the revised GHGs, we will not be making revisions to the 
annual reports submitted and certified by reporters to reflect the 
revised GWPs finalized in this rulemaking. We intend to publish the 
submitted and certified annual reports in FLIGHT and publish a version 
of the CO2e emissions and supply estimates for the reporting 
years 2010, 2011, and 2012 using the revised GWPs in Table A-1 
separately. The EPA will clearly delineate data submitted to the EPA by 
reporters and data recalculated by EPA. The revised emission and supply 
estimates will be used to create a consistent time series of 
CO2e estimates using the amended GWPs. We may present the 
annual report totals and the revised CO2e estimates in 
parallel thru FLIGHT; however, any revised CO2e values 
published will be clearly identified with a caveat explaining how the 
revised CO2e values were calculated and the reason why the 
values were recalculated. As such, the dataset provided will be an 
analysis of the data submitted by reporters, and will not constitute 
changes to the annual reports. The certified 2010 through 2012 reports 
(excluding confidential business information) will continue to be made 
available to the public through our Web site and will reflect the data 
as reported and certified by the reporter.
    This approach allows the EPA to publish revised emission and supply 
totals without increasing burden on reporters for the submittal of 
revised reports and allows for comparison of emissions on an individual 
facility basis from reporting years 2010 through 2012 with those 
published in 2013 and beyond. This revised CO2e data will 
provide a more accurate picture of facility-level emissions for each 
industry over time.
    This approach also clarifies that the GWPs finalized in this 
rulemaking are only applied prospectively, and do not affect the 
applicability for reporters that was determined for prior years. The 
revised emission and supply totals for years 2010 through 2012 will be 
wholly separate from the published values supplied by reporters for 
annual reports that may be used by sources for purposes of evaluating 
applicability of under other GHG programs, such as the EPA's Tailoring 
Rule. As discussed in Section II.A.2.c of this preamble, applicability 
determinations and permits issued prior to the effective date of the 
revised Table A-1 will not be affected by the new GWPs. Therefore, the 
revised totals will not retroactively affect determinations of 
permitting applicability.
    We disagree with the commenters' statement that the decision to 
recalculate CO2e values for 2010 through 2012 creates 
confusion, undermines regulatory or business certainty, or will alter 
GHG mitigation methods. No additional burden is placed on reporters 
since reporters are not required to resubmit reports for 2010 through 
2012 reporting years. In the 2013 reporting year and subsequent years, 
reporters will use the revised GWP values in Table A-1 of subpart A to 
calculate emissions in CO2e. In most cases, however, 
reporters use the e-GGRT webforms or spreadsheets that automatically 
calculate CO2e values based on the GHG emissions and supply 
data entered by the facility. Only facilities that use the XML schema 
for reporting will need to make revisions for the 2013 reporting year.
    We note that the reported emissions of each individual GHG emitted 
by the facility or supplied by a supplier for reporting years 2010, 
2011, and 2012 remain unchanged. Only the relative weighting of the 
impacts of each GHG are changed by revisions to the GWPs. Using 
consistent and up-to-date GWP values, reviewed and approved by the 
scientific community, enables us to better evaluate the relative impact 
of GHG emissions on global warming, make better informed decisions on 
future mitigation methods, and track emission trends.
    Although the EPA is revising the GWPs and making other minor rule 
revisions in this final rule, none of these changes apply retroactively 
to reporters. The EPA is not requiring new reporters who became subject 
to reporting only as the result of changes in the GWP values to submit 
reports for previous reporting years. Nor are we requiring existing 
reporters to submit and certify revised annual reports for previous 
reporting years or review and certify revised CO2e values 
calculated by the EPA.
    Comment: Although most commenters supported Option 2 (either 
outright or as compared to Option 1), many suggested that EPA provide 
an opportunity for reporting entities to review and provide comment on 
CO2e values recalculated by the EPA before those values are 
published. These commenters stated that review is important to avoid 
errors being made in the published data. Some commenters also stated 
that reporters should be given the option to voluntarily revise their 
previous annual reports themselves.
    Response: The EPA intends to provide an opportunity for facilities 
to view their recalculated facility-level CO2e totals before 
publication. The Agency does not believe it will be useful to formally 
solicit comments on the recalculated GWPs. Because application

[[Page 71939]]

of the new GWPs will be a very simple recalculation that has no bearing 
on a facility's annual report, the EPA does not want to place any 
additional burden on reporters. However, if a reporter were to find an 
error, we would as always welcome feedback through our Help Desk. We do 
not plan to make a formal solicitation for comment from reporters prior 
to publication of the recalculated CO2e emissions and supply 
because these republished values will be clearly labeled as the results 
of EPA analysis to avoid their confusion with the certified emissions 
reports submitted by facilities. The EPA will review the recalculated 
CO2e values to ensure they are accurate before making them 
available to the public. We have decided not to allow reporters to 
submit revised certified reports for reporting years 2010, 2011, and 
2012 with CO2e values calculated using the revised GWPs. 
Based on the comments we received on Option 1, we consider it unlikely 
that many reporters would voluntarily revise their 2010 through 2012 
reports, and to allow a few reporters to do so would be confusing to 
the public when reviewing non-CBI versions of the annual reports 
published on our Web site.

IV. Confidentiality Determinations

A. Final Confidentiality Determinations for New and Revised Data 
Elements

    The EPA received only supportive comments on the proposed 
confidentiality determinations, and is finalizing the confidentiality 
determinations as proposed for all but 2 of the new and substantially 
revised data elements that were proposed. The EPA is not finalizing two 
proposed data elements: one in subpart AA, annual production of paper 
products exiting the paper machine(s) prior to application of any off-
machine coatings (40 CFR 98.276(k)(2) proposed) as discussed in Section 
II.N of this preamble; and one in subpart FF, amount of CH4 
routed to each destruction device (40 CFR 98.326(t) proposed) as 
discussed in Section II.Q of this preamble. As a result, the EPA is not 
finalizing category assignments or confidentiality determinations for 
these two data elements.
    In addition, there are some data elements in subparts A, C, X, FF, 
HH, NN, and TT that have been clarified 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 3 of this preamble).

         Table 3--Revised Data Elements With Final Category Assignment and Confidentiality Determination
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Data category
             Citation                 assigned to during    Data element description,  Data element description,
                                           proposal                as proposed                as finalized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR 98.3(c)(1) (proposed); 40    Facility and Unit      If a facility does not      If the facility does not
 CFR 98.3(c)(1) (finalized).         Identifier             have a physical street      have a physical street
                                     Information.           address, then the           address, then the
                                                            facility must provide the   facility must provide
                                                            latitude and longitude      the latitude and
                                                            representing the location   longitude representing
                                                            of facility operations in   the geographic centroid
                                                            decimal degree format.      or center point of
                                                                                        facility operations in
                                                                                        decimal degree format.
40 CFR 98.3(c)(13) (proposed); 40   Facility and Unit      For combustion units used   An indication of whether
 CFR 98.3(c)(13) and (e.g., annual   Identifier             to generate electricity     the facility includes
 operation hours of the gas          Information.           for delivery to the grid,   one or more plant sites
 collection system (98.346(i)(7)),                          ORIS code for each          that have been assigned
 40 CFR 98.36(b)(11), 40 CFR 98.36                          combustion unit serving     a ``plant code'' (as
 (c) (1)(xi), 40 CFR 98.36                                  an electric generator.      defined under 40 CFR
 (c)(2)(x), 40 CFR 98.36                                                                98.6) by either the
 (c)(3)(x), 40 CFR 98.36                                                                Department of Energy's
 (d)(1)(x), 40 CFR 98.36                                                                (DOE) Energy Information
 (d)(2)(ii)(J), and 40 CFR 98.36                                                        Administration (EIA) or
 (d)(2)(iii)(J) (finalized).                                                            by the EPA's Clean Air
                                                                                        Markets Division (CAMD).
                                                                                        40 CFR 98.36(b)(11):
                                                                                        Plant code (as defined
                                                                                        in 98.6), 40 CFR
                                                                                        98.36(c)(1)(xi): Plant
                                                                                        code (as defined in
                                                                                        98.6), 40 CFR
                                                                                        98.36(c)(2)(x): Plant
                                                                                        code (as defined in
                                                                                        98.6), 40 CFR
                                                                                        98.36(c)(3)(x): Plant
                                                                                        code (as defined in
                                                                                        98.6), 40 CFR
                                                                                        98.36(d)(1)(x): Plant
                                                                                        code (as defined in
                                                                                        98.6), 40 CFR
                                                                                        98.36(d)(2)(ii)(J):
                                                                                        Plant code (as defined
                                                                                        in 98.6), 40 CFR
                                                                                        98.36(d) (2)(iii)(J):
                                                                                        Plant code (as defined
                                                                                        in 98.6).
40 CFR 98.246(b)(4) (proposed); 40  Emissions............  For each CEMS monitoring    For each CEMS monitoring
 CFR 98.246(b)(4) finalized.                                location that meets the     location that meets the
                                                            conditions in paragraph     conditions in paragraph
                                                            (b)(2) or (3) of this       (b)(2) or (3) of this
                                                            section, provide an         section, provide an
                                                            estimate based on           estimate based on
                                                            engineering judgment of     engineering judgment of
                                                            the fraction of the total   the fraction of the
                                                            CO2 emissions that is       total CO2 emissions that
                                                            attributable to the         results from CO2
                                                            petrochemical process       directly emitted by the
                                                            unit.                       petrochemical process
                                                                                        unit plus CO2 generated
                                                                                        by the combustion of off-
                                                                                        gas from the
                                                                                        petrochemical process
                                                                                        unit.

[[Page 71940]]

 
40 CFR 98.326(r)(2)(proposed); 40   Unit/process           Start date of each well     Start date of each well,
 CFR 98.326(r)(2) (finalized).       Operating              and shaft.                  shaft, and vent hole.
                                     Characteristics That
                                     are Not Inputs to
                                     Emission Equations;
                                     Not Emissions Data
                                     and Not CBI.
40 CFR 98.326(r)(2) (proposed); 40                         Close date of each well     Close date of each well,
 CFR 98.326(r)(2) (finalized).                              and shaft.                  shaft, and vent hole.
40 CFR 98.326(r)(3) (proposed); 40                         Number of days each or      Number of days each well,
 CFR 98.326(r)(3) (finalized).                              shaft was in operation      shaft, or vent hole was
                                                            during the reporting year.  in operation during the
                                                                                        reporting year.
40 CFR 98.466(h) (proposed); 40     Emissions............  For landfills with gas      For landfills with gas
 CFR 98.466(h)(1) (finalized).                              collection systems,         collection systems,
                                                            methane generation, using   methane generation,
                                                            equation TT-6.              adjusted for oxidation,
                                                                                        calculated using
                                                                                        equation TT-6.
40 CFR 98.466(h) (proposed); 40     Inputs to Emission     For landfills with gas      For landfills with gas
 CFR 98.466(h)(2) (finalized).       Equations.             collection systems,         collection systems,
                                                            oxidation factor.           oxidation factor used in
                                                                                        Equation TT-6.
40 CFR 98.406(b)(7)...............  Customer and Vendor    LCDs: Annual volume in      LCDs: Annual volume in
                                     Information.           Mscf of natural gas         Mscf of natural gas
                                                            delivered by the LDC to     delivered by the LDC to
                                                            each sales or               each large end-user as
                                                            transportation customer's   defined in 40 CFR
                                                            facility that received      98.403(b)(2)(i).
                                                            from the LDC deliveries
                                                            equal to or greater than
                                                            460,000 Mscf during the
                                                            calendar year, if known;
                                                            otherwise, the annual
                                                            volume in Mscf of natural
                                                            gas delivered by the LDC
                                                            to each meter registering
                                                            supply equal to or
                                                            greater than 460,000 Mscf
                                                            during the calendar year.
40 CFR 98.406(b)(12)..............  Customer and Vendor    LCDs: Meter number for      LCDs: Meter number for
                                     Information.           each end-user reported in   each large end-user
                                                            paragraph (b)(7).           reported in paragraph
                                                                                        (b)(7).
40 CFR 98.406(b)(12)..............  Customer and Vendor    LCDs: Whether the quantity  LCDs: Whether the
                                     Information.           of natural gas reported     quantity of natural gas
                                                            in paragraph (b)(7) is      reported in paragraph
                                                            the total quantity          (b)(7) is the total
                                                            delivered or the quantity   quantity delivered or
                                                            delivered to a specific     the quantity delivered
                                                            meter.                      to a large end-user's
                                                                                        facility, or the
                                                                                        quantity delivered to a
                                                                                        specific meter located
                                                                                        at the facility.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the proposed rule, the EPA assigned thirteen proposed new data 
elements to the inputs to emission equations data category and received 
no comment on the proposed category assignments. As discussed above, 
one proposed new data element, from subpart FF, which was proposed to 
be assigned to the inputs to emission equations category is no longer 
included in this action. Additionally, as discussed in Section II.R of 
this preamble, the final revision to 40 CFR 98.346(i) includes three 
more new data elements than were proposed in subpart HH. The current 
rule had assumed only one measurement location and two possible 
destruction devices and therefore required reporting of only the 
operating hours for the ``primary'' and ``back-up'' destruction devices 
and a single value for destruction efficiency and methane recovery 
using Equation HH-4, all of which were categorized as inputs to 
emission equations. With these final revisions, the EPA is now 
requiring facilities to report the number of destruction devices and 
the operating hours and destruction efficiency for each device 
associated with a given measurement location (40 CFR 98.346(i)(5) and 
(7)). The EPA is also finalizing an amendment that methane recovery 
calculated using Equation HH-4 be reported separately for each 
measurement location (40 CFR 98.346(i)(6)). Because the three 
additional data elements are the same type of information as had been 
collected previously, the only difference being that they are now 
collected by measurement location, the EPA similarly assigns them to 
the inputs to emission equations data category in the final rule. As a 
result, there are now a total of 15 new data elements assigned to the 
inputs to emission equations category.
    The EPA had previously expressed an intent to conduct an ``in-depth 
evaluation of the potential impact from the release of inputs to 
equations'' (76FR 53057 and 53060, August 25, 2011); (77 FR 48072, 
August 13, 2012). We conducted an evaluation of these fifteen new 
inputs following the process outline in the memorandum ``Process for 
Evaluating and Potentially Amending Part 98 Inputs to Emission 
Equations'' (Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0929). This evaluation is 
summarized in the memorandum ``Summary of Evaluation of `Inputs to

[[Page 71941]]

Emission Equations' Data Elements Added with the 2013 Revisions to the 
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule.'' (See Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-
0934.)
    Please see the memorandum titled ``Final data category assignments 
and confidentiality determinations for new and substantially revised 
data elements in the `2013 Revisions to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting 
Rule and Confidentiality Determinations for New or Substantially 
Revised Data Elements' '' (``Confidentiality Determinations 
Memorandum'') in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934 for a list of the 
new or substantially revised data elements, their final category 
assignments, and their confidentiality determinations (whether 
categorical or individual) except for those assigned to the inputs to 
equations category.

B. Public Comments on the Proposed Confidentiality Determinations and 
Responses to Public Comment

    The EPA is finalizing all confidentiality determinations as they 
were proposed. Please refer to the preamble to the proposed rule (77 FR 
63570) for additional information regarding the proposed 
confidentiality determinations. For comments and responses regarding 
confidentiality determinations for new and revised data elements, 
please refer to the comment response document in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2012-0934.

V. Impacts of the Final Rule

A. Impacts of the Final Amendments Due to Revised Global Warming 
Potentials

    This section of the preamble examines the costs and economic 
impacts of the final rulemaking and the estimated economic impacts of 
the rule on affected entities, including estimated impacts on small 
entities.
    As discussed in the proposed rule, the amendments to Table A-1 of 
Part 98 may affect both the number of facilities required to report 
under Part 98 and the quantities of GHGs reported. This is because the 
GWPs in Table A-1 are used to calculate emissions (or supply) of GHGs 
in CO2e for determination of whether a facility meets a 
CO2e-based threshold and is required to report and to 
calculate total facility emissions for submittal in the annual report. 
The amendments to Table A-1 include adopting GWPs that generally are 
higher than the values currently in the table and will result in higher 
reported emissions of CO2e for facilities that emit 
compounds for which the revised GWP is greater. In some cases, this 
will increase the number of facilities required to report under Part 98 
and the total emissions reported for these facilities.
    The EPA received several comments on the impacts of the proposed 
rule. Specifically, we received comments stating that EPA significantly 
underestimated both the number of newly subject subpart HH MSW 
Landfills and the added costs of compliance imposed on both new and 
existing reporters, who are affected by the increase in the GWP for 
methane. As a result of these comments, the EPA has revised the impacts 
analysis for subpart HH, Municipal Landfills. The EPA has also updated 
the impacts assessment to calculate the total emissions increase from 
all reporters using 2011 reported data that became available following 
the publication of the proposed rule. In the proposed rule, the impacts 
assessment for the subparts that began reporting in RY 2011 relied on 
information from the EPA's Economic Impacts Analyses and technical 
support documents for each of those subparts from the final Part 98. 
The new data is based on emissions estimates and data submitted in 2011 
annual reports and is more accurate for the purposes of calculating the 
impacts from this final rule. We have also revised the analysis to 
exclude the 26 additional fluorinated GHGs that were proposed to be 
included in Table A-1, as we are not finalizing GWPs for these 
compounds in this rulemaking (see Section I.D of this preamble). 
Although some commenters requested that the impacts analysis should 
include the costs associated with implementation issues related to 
other EPA programs (e.g., EPA's Tailoring Rule), we have determined 
that it is not appropriate to include these impacts under this Part 98 
rulemaking. See Section V.C of this preamble for the EPA's response to 
these comments.
    The final amendments to Table A-1 will result in a collective 
increase in annual reported emissions from all subparts of more than 79 
million metric tons CO2e (a 1.1 percent increase in existing 
emissions), which the EPA has concluded more accurately reflects the 
estimated radiative forcing from the emissions reported under Part 98. 
The increase includes 4.8 million metric tons CO2e from an 
estimated 184 additional facilities that may be newly required to 
report under Part 98 based on the revised GWPs. The number of new 
reporters estimated, the estimated increase in emissions or supply from 
existing reporters (reporters who submitted 2010 and 2011 reports) and 
new reporters, and the estimated total change in source category 
emissions or supply for each subpart are summarized in the memorandum 
``Assessment of Emissions and Cost Impacts of 2013 Revisions to the 
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule and Confidentiality Determinations for 
New or Substantially Revised Data Elements'' (hereinafter referred to 
as ``Impacts Analysis'') (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934).
    Additional reporters are expected to report under subparts I, W, 
HH, II, OO, and TT due to an increase in the number of facilities 
exceeding the CO2e threshold. The majority of these 
additional reporters are be expected from subpart W, Petroleum and 
Natural Gas Systems, and subpart HH, Municipal Solid Waste Landfills. 
There are no expected additional reporters from the remaining subparts. 
The revisions do not reduce the number of reporters that meet 
CO2e thresholds for any subpart. A detailed analysis of the 
impacts for each subpart, including the number of additional reporters 
expected, the quantities of annual GHGs reported, and the compliance 
costs for expected additional reporters, is included in the Impacts 
Analysis for the final rule (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934).
    The total cost of compliance for the additional reporters is 
expected to be $2.2 million for the first year and $1.3 million per 
year for subsequent years. The annual costs for the additional 
reporters is an approximate increase of 1.3 percent above the existing 
reporters cost of compliance with Part 98. The costs of the final 
amendments and the associated methodology are summarized in Section 
V.A.2 of this preamble.
1. How were the number of reporters and the change in annual emissions 
or supply estimated?
    As in the proposed rule, the EPA evaluated the number of reporters 
affected by the final amendments by examining the 2010 and 2011 
reporters that are already required to report under Part 98. For the 
number of affected facilities, the EPA examined available e-GGRT data 
from the 2010 and 2011 reporting years and summary data that were 
developed to support the existing Part 98 to determine the number of 
existing affected facilities. We then evaluated the number of 
additional facilities that are required to report under each subpart by 
determining what additional facilities could exceed Part 98 source 
category thresholds, using the criteria presented in the 2013 Revisions 
proposal (see 78 FR 19841, April 2, 2013). The subparts that could have 
new reporters as a result of the changes to

[[Page 71942]]

Table A-1 are subparts I, W, HH, II, OO, and TT. We identified the 
number of additional reporters expected under each subpart following 
the methodology outlined in the proposed rule (78 FR 19841).
    The EPA determined the estimated increases in reported emissions 
for each subpart by examining the available data from facilities that 
submitted an annual report for reporting year 2011. For these 
reporters, we estimated the increase in calculated emissions from each 
facility by adjusting the reported GHG mass emissions to 
CO2e using the proposed AR4 GWPs. We also estimated the 
increase in emissions that would result from additional reporters in 
each subpart expected to exceed the source category threshold. For 
those facilities, the available source-specific emissions data for the 
expected new reporters was calculated in terms of CO2e and 
the estimated emissions were included in the total source category 
emissions. Additional information on the EPA's analysis of the 
estimated number of reporters and the increase in reported 
CO2e for each subpart is in the Impacts Analysis for the 
final rule (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934).
2. How were the costs of this final rule estimated?
    The compliance costs associated with the final amendments were 
determined for those additional reporters who are required to submit an 
annual report under Part 98. The total compliance costs for additional 
reporters are estimated to be $2.2 million for the first year and $1.3 
million for subsequent years (2011 dollars).
    Costs for additional reporters are summarized in Table 4 of this 
preamble, which presents the first-year and subsequent-year costs for 
each source category. To estimate the cost impacts for additional 
reporters, the EPA used the same methodology from the 2013 Revisions 
proposal. In addition to the costs for new reporters, the EPA estimated 
costs for closed landfills, or landfills expected to close within the 
next ten years, that would have an extended number of years of required 
reporting due to the increase in the GWP for methane. The cost for 
these additional years of reporting is included in Table 4 of this 
preamble. Costs are not included for landfills that were closed prior 
to January 1, 2013, have not previously reported under Part 98, and who 
generated less than 1,190 metric tons of CH4 in the 2010, 
2011, 2012 and 2013 reporting years. Landfills meeting these conditions 
are not required to report per the final revisions to subpart HH 
applicability (see Section II.R of this preamble for additional 
information).

                       Table 4--Cost Impacts of Final Amendments for Additional Reporters
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Incremental
                                                                                    Incremental     cost impact
                                                                     Number of      cost impact   for additional
                             Subpart                                additional    for additional   reporters ($/
                                                                   reporters due   reporters ($/      yr for
                                                                  to revised GWP   yr for first     subsequent
                                                                                       year)          years)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I--Electronics Manufacturing....................................               4         129,500         237,000
W--Petroleum & Natural Gas Systems..............................              99       1,648,000         772,000
HH--Municipal Solid Waste Landfills.............................              57         246,000         182,200
II--Industrial Wastewater.......................................               2          10,800          10,500
OO--Industrial GHG Suppliers....................................               3          13,100          10,000
TT--Industrial Waste Landfills..................................              19         112,000          98,050
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................             184       2,195,400       1,316,750
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Subpart HH cost impact includes the reporting costs for 43 closed landfills that will exit the reporting
  program later than expected. Similarly, subpart TT cost impact includes the cost for 8 closed facilities.

    For existing reporters that have submitted an annual report for 
reporting year 2010 or 2011, there will be no significant cost impacts 
resulting from the proposed amendments to Table A-1; using the revised 
GWPs does not affect the cost of monitoring and recordkeeping and does 
not materially affect the cost for calculating emissions for these 
facilities. See the Impacts Analysis (Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-
0934) for more details.

B. What are the impacts of the other amendments and revisions in this 
final rule?

    There are no other changes from proposed rule to the impacts from 
the remaining amendments and revisions in this final rule. This final 
rule continues to include clarifications to terms and definitions for 
certain emission equations, simplifications to calculation methods and 
data reporting requirements, or corrections for consistency between 
provisions within a subpart or between subparts in Part 98. These 
amendments do not fundamentally affect the applicability, monitoring 
requirements, or data collected and reported, or increase the 
recordkeeping and reporting burden associated with Part 98. 
Additionally, the final confidentiality determinations for new or 
substantially revised data elements do not affect whether and how data 
are reported and therefore, do not impose any additional burden on 
sources. See the EPA's full analysis of the additional impacts of the 
corrections, clarifying, and other amendments in the Impacts Analysis 
in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934).

C. Summary of Comments and Responses Regarding Impacts

    This section summarizes the significant comments and responses 
related to the impacts and burden of the proposed revisions. See the 
comment response document in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934 for a 
complete listing of all comments and responses related to the impacts 
of this rulemaking.
    Comment: Several commenters argued that the proposed rule does not 
calculate the complete cost of amending Table A-1, stating that the 
proposal merely estimates the costs that would be incurred by 
facilities that become subject to the Reporting Rule due to the amended 
GWP values. The commenters explained that the EPA should also calculate 
the costs incurred by facilities that become major sources of GHGs as a 
result of the amended GWP values and solicit public comment on the new 
cost calculations. The commenters asserted that the costs of performing 
a PSD review and obtaining a title V permit are substantial, and that 
the costs of obtaining a synthetic minor permit, while lower, are not 
insignificant. In

[[Page 71943]]

addition, commenters pointed out that some projects will be delayed or 
modified because of the requirement to obtain a permit before 
commencing construction, and that costs are especially significant in 
cases where a company planned and designed a project with the 
expectation that the facility would be a minor source for purposes of 
PSD, but must now conduct a PSD review because the facility is a major 
source under the new GWP values. One commenter stated that these added 
burdens are unwarranted, particularly since the added burdens are not a 
response to any increase in emissions. Other commenters maintained that 
it is insufficient for the EPA to simply state that EPA will work with 
permitting authorities and other stakeholders as necessary to provide 
guidance, that the EPA must provide some meaningful analysis of the 
impacts on these changes on regulators and industry under other 
affected regulatory programs, and that issues and concerns needing 
guidance should be addressed through public comment before promulgation 
of the final rule.
    Response: The EPA disagrees with commenters that the Impacts 
Analysis for the GHG Reporting Rule must include the costs incurred by 
facilities that become major sources of GHGs as a result of the amended 
GWP values. The cost impacts and burden associated with exceeding 
permitting thresholds were analyzed under the Tailoring Rule. Even 
though the Tailoring Rule analysis was based on the GWP values that 
were effective at the time of the analysis (from the 2009 GHG Reporting 
Rule), we do not believe that the amended GWP values would 
significantly change the Tailoring Rule analysis and the overall 
conclusions on permitting burden relief reached in terms of 
establishing thresholds for GHG permitting.
    With regard to the commenters' suggestion that some projects will 
be delayed or modified because of the amended GWP values, the EPA 
believes that permit applicants who may be potentially impacted by the 
amended GWP changes have been made aware of the anticipated GWP changes 
through the notice and comment regulatory process of amending Part 98. 
The effects of the updates to Table A-1 on the Tailoring Rule were 
addressed in the Response to Public Comments on the Tailoring Rule (see 
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0517-19181, p. 101): ``Any changes to 
Table A-1 of the mandatory GHG reporting rule regulatory text must go 
through an appropriate notice-and-comment regulatory process. . . . the 
lead time for adopting changes to that rule will provide a transition 
time to address implementation concerns raised by commenters.''
    As noted in Section II.A.2.c of this preamble, to the extent that a 
Table A-1 amendment raises permitting implementation questions or 
concerns, the EPA will work with permitting authorities and other 
stakeholders as necessary to provide guidance on their issues and 
concerns.
    Comment: Several comments stated that the EPA did not accurately 
assess the impact of the GWP revisions on MSW landfills. Commenters 
indicated that the EPA significantly underestimated both the number of 
newly subject subpart HH MSW Landfills and the added costs of 
compliance imposed by these changes on both new and existing reporters. 
The commenters disputed the EPA's conclusion in the Impacts Analysis 
accompanying the proposal that no closed landfills would be affected by 
the change in GWPs. According to commenters, several closed landfills 
with methane generations between 21,000 and 24,999 metric tons/year 
CO2e could exceed the threshold due to the proposed revision 
of the GWP for methane. One commenter claimed that, although emissions 
from these landfills will steadily decline, they could be required to 
report for at least three to five years as a result of the revised GWP 
for methane, and would thus face a significant impact. Commenters also 
pointed out that this situation is also likely to arise for small 
municipalities that own closed facilities.
    Commenters also stated that the EPA failed to recognize that 
revising GWPs will delay the date by which low-emitting MSW landfills 
can exit the reporting program. They explained that while the proposal 
Impacts Analysis estimated methane generation at a closed landfill 
decreases 18% in 5 years, an increase in GWP from 21 to 25 will 
increase modeled emissions by 20% and will therefore delay exit from 
the reporting program obligations by more than 5 years.
    Commenters also asserted that EPA underestimated the cost of 
complying with the proposed amended reporting requirements under 
subpart HH. They stated that, based on industry reporting experience, 
they believe actual annual costs to comply with the monitoring 
recordkeeping and reporting requirements are four to five times higher 
than the EPA estimates in Table 11 of the proposal preamble and Tables 
4-1 and 6-16 of the Impacts Analysis, which state the incremental 
annual cost impact for new subpart HH reporters is $309,700 (or $5,434 
per facility) for the initial year of reporting and $137,500 (or $2,413 
per site) in subsequent years of reporting (2011 US Dollars). Two 
commenters attested that data they had submitted to the EPA previously 
on ongoing reporting showed that the annual cost per landfill for 
subsequent years of reporting ranged from $10,000 to $15,000 per site. 
One commenter stated that the EPA also did not account for the cost of 
responding to EPA questions raised on facility reports, which require a 
facility to respond within 45 days and may require corrections and 
report re-submittal.
    Response: Upon further analysis, the EPA agrees that there may be 
closed landfills with methane generation between 21,000 and 24,999 
metric tons/year CO2e, and that under the proposed rule 
these closed facilities would be subject to new reporting requirements. 
For this reason, a provision has been included in the final amendments 
to subpart HH that specifically exempts landfills that did not accept 
waste on or after January 1, 2013 and had methane generation less than 
1,190 metric tons of methane (25,000 CO2e). See Section II.R 
of this preamble for additional discussion.
    The EPA also agrees that the economic impact assessment for the 
changes to the GWP of methane did not include the cost that closed, or 
soon to be closed, landfills would incur due to the extended number of 
years that reporting will be required. In response to this comment, we 
have estimated that there are approximately 196 closed MSW landfills, 
and 233 open MSW landfills, expected to close within the next ten 
years, that will be required to submit reports for an additional 5 
years. Of these facilities, we estimated there are 43 facilities that 
will incur one or more additional years of reporting within the next 
ten years. The average additional annual cost for these facilities is 
estimated at $37,360. The EPA has also made a similar estimate of costs 
for industrial landfills (subpart TT), and has concluded that there are 
eight facilities that may be required to report for one or more 
additional years within the next ten years. The annual average cost 
associated with these reports is $12,000. The details of these changes 
to the cost impact are available in the Impacts Analysis in Docket Id. 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934.
    With regard to the comment that the EPA underestimated the cost to 
submit reports for all facilities and that the costs incurred by 
facilities are four to five times higher than the EPA originally 
estimated, this information was taken into consideration in the most 
recent Information Collection Request

[[Page 71944]]

(ICR) (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0333) and no changes were 
made to the estimated cost to report based on the information submitted 
(see EPA's response to comments on the GHGRP renewal ICR, dated May 
2013, in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0333). The major factor 
influencing the cost from both companies was the frequency of 
monitoring required for estimating emissions from Municipal Solid Waste 
Landfills (subpart HH). The EPA disagrees with the feedback provided. 
In making the cost estimates, the EPA assumes that the operators will 
pick the lowest cost operations for monitoring emissions. Part of this 
assumption includes that landfill operators will be visiting the 
landfills at least once a week under normal operation to check and 
maintain equipment. The majority of landfills in the U.S. are active 
and would not require additional visits to monitor emissions. We 
concluded, after evaluating comments about underestimating the 
reporting burden, that the Agency's methodology and assumptions used in 
the Economic Impact Analysis were sound and relied on the best 
available data. Therefore, it is reasonable of EPA to use the Economic 
Impact Analysis to estimate total cost burden on landfills affected by 
the changes to the revised GWP, and the Economic Impact Analysis 
provides a reasonable characterization of costs and adequate 
explanation of how the costs were estimated. As we discussed in Section 
VII of the final Part 98 preamble (74 FR 56362, October 30, 2009), the 
EPA collected and evaluated cost data from multiple sources, thoroughly 
reviewed the input received through public comments, and weighed the 
analysis against this input.
    Comment: Some commenters asserted that any time the EPA changes 
factors to be used in estimating a facility's GHG emissions for 
reporting purposes (such as GWPs, fuel emission factors, or high 
heating values), companies have to expend substantial efforts to revise 
systems they have developed and put in place, often at considerable 
cost, to collect the required information, apply the GHG emission 
estimation methods the EPA requires, and consolidate and report GHG 
emission estimates to the EPA. They explained that in addition to 
imposing substantial burdens on businesses and public and private 
institutions, it also introduces the potential for errors every time 
existing reporting systems have to be modified. The commenters argued 
that the EPA is neglecting to account for the costs incurred by 
existing reporters to implement these changes.
    One commenter contended that, if the primary use for GHG emissions 
reported under the GHGRP is for comparative purposes (i.e. determining 
trends in GHG emissions, comparing U.S. emissions to those of other 
countries, etc.), making relatively small revisions to the methods for 
calculating estimated GHG emissions is not going to produce a benefit 
that warrants the burden imposed on regulated facilities to adjust to 
those revisions. The commenter recommended that the EPA not promulgate 
future changes to GWPs, nor other changes to the methodologies for 
estimating GHG emissions in the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule, if the 
change is unlikely to produce more than a five percent change in 
estimated emissions.
    Response: As the EPA stated in the preamble for the proposed 
amendments (78 FR 19802, April 2, 2013), the amendments reflect the 
EPA's engagement with reporters and stakeholders and our understanding 
of the technical challenges and burden associated with implementation 
of Part 98 provisions. The changes improve the GHGRP by clarifying 
compliance obligations and reducing confusion for reporters, improving 
the consistency of the data collected, and ensuring that data collected 
through the GHGRP is representative of industry and comparable to other 
inventories. The proposed changes simplify data collection and 
reporting for reporters and reduce the burden associated with 
implementing certain provisions of 40 CFR part 98. These clarifications 
and corrections do not fundamentally affect the applicability, 
monitoring requirements, or data collected and reported or increase the 
recordkeeping and reporting burden associated with Part 98. The EPA 
estimated the impacts of the corrections, clarifying, and other 
amendments in the Impacts Analysis in Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-
0934 and determined that the impacts from these changes to each subpart 
was minimal. As such, the EPA has determined the amendments to the 
final rule do not present an undue cost burden on reporters.

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 not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the 
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is 
therefore not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 
(76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011). This action (1) clarifies or changes 
specific provisions in the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule, including 
amending Table A-1 of Subpart A to incorporate revised GWPs from the 
IPCC AR4, and (2) finalizes confidentiality determinations for the 
reporting of new or substantially revised (i.e., requiring additional 
or different data to be reported) data elements contained in the final 
amendments. The EPA prepared an analysis of the potential compliance 
costs associated with the final amendments and amendments to revise 
global warming potentials in subpart A. This analysis is contained in 
the Impacts Analysis (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934). A copy 
of the analysis is available in the docket for this action and the 
analysis is briefly summarized here. The total compliance costs for 
additional reporters are $1,316,700 ($2011). The highest costs are 
anticipated for 99 facilities affected by subpart W, Petroleum and 
Natural Gas Systems, ($772,000), 4 facilities affected by subpart I, 
Electronics Manufacturing ($237,000), and 57 facilities affected by 
subpart HH, Municipal Solid Waste Landfills ($182,200). New facilities 
required to report under subparts II, OO, and TT incur a combined cost 
of $118,550. The final confidentiality determinations for new and 
substantially revised data elements do not increase the existing 
compliance costs. The compliance costs associated with the final 
amendments are less than the significance threshold of $100 million per 
year. The compliance costs for individual facilities are not expected 
to impose a significant economic burden.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the 
information collection requirements for 40 CFR part 98 under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and 
has assigned OMB control number 2060-0629, ICR 2300.10. The OMB control 
numbers for EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. 
The revisions in this final action result in a small increase in 
burden, and the ICR will be modified to reflect this burden change.
    This action finalizes amended GWP values in subpart A and other 
corrections and harmonizing revisions, and finalizes confidentiality 
determinations for the reporting of new or substantially revised (i.e., 
requiring additional or different data to be

[[Page 71945]]

reported) data elements contained in the final amendments. These final 
amendments and confidentiality determinations do not make any 
substantive changes to the reporting requirements in any of the 
subparts for which amendments are being finalized. The final amendments 
to subpart A include revision of existing GWPs in Table A-1 of subpart 
A. As discussed in Section V of this preamble, the final amendments 
could affect the total number of facilities reporting under Part 98 and 
increase the collective annual emissions or supply reported. The EPA 
prepared an analysis of the compliance costs associated with the final 
amendments to Table A-1 in the Impacts Analysis (see Docket Id. No. 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0934).
    Other amendments to subpart A include adding requirements that 
provide reporters instruction regarding reporting of location, 
ownership, and facility identification (i.e., reporting of plant 
codes). The remaining changes also include revising and adding 
definitions. The revisions are clarifications or require reporting of 
information that facilities are expected to have readily available 
(e.g., latitude and longitude of the facility, unit-level and 
configuration-level ``plant code''), and are not expected to result in 
significant burden for reporters.
    The amendments to the reporting requirements in the source 
category-specific subparts generally do not change the nature of the 
data reported and are not anticipated to result in significant burden 
for reporters. For example, several of the amendments are 
clarifications or corrections to existing reporting requirements. For 
example, for subpart H, the EPA is requiring reporting of annual, 
facility-wide cement production instead of monthly, kiln-specific 
cement production for facilities that use a CEMS to measure 
CO2 emissions. Because facilities are already expected to 
track facility-wide cement production for budgeting purposes, we do not 
expect this revision to result in any additional burden for cement 
production facilities. In some cases we are including reporting 
requirements for data that are already collected by reporters. For 
instance, for subpart RR, the EPA is adding a reporting requirement for 
facilities to report the standard or method used to calculate the mass 
or volume of contents in containers that is redelivered to another 
facility without being injected into the well. The new data element 
does not require additional data collection or monitoring from 
reporters, and is not a significant change.
    The EPA is also finalizing changes that would reduce the reporting 
burden. For example, for subpart BB (Silicon Carbide Production), the 
EPA is removing the requirement for facilities to report CH4 
emissions from silicon carbide process units or furnaces. Additionally, 
the EPA is amending subpart BB such that facilities would calculate and 
report CO2 emissions for all process units and furnaces 
combined, instead of each process unit or production furnace. We expect 
that both of these major changes will reduce the reporting burden for 
facilities subject to subpart BB.
    Additional changes to the reporting requirements in each subpart 
are detailed in the Impacts Analysis (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2012-0934).

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative 
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, 
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impact of this final rule on small 
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined 
by the Small Business Administration's regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; 
(2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, 
county, town, school district or special district with a population of 
less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-
profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not 
dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's final rule on 
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The small 
entities directly regulated by this final rule are small businesses. We 
have determined that up to 80 small municipal solid waste landfills, 
representing up to a 1 percent increase in regulated businesses in this 
industry, will experience an impact of 0.02 to 0.6 percent of revenues; 
up to 3 suppliers of industrial GHGs, representing up to a 0.85 percent 
increase in regulated businesses in this industry, will experience an 
impact of 0.02 to 0.14 percent of revenues; and that up to 27 
industrial waste landfills (primarily co-located with food processing 
facilities), representing up to a 7.3 percent increase in regulated 
businesses in this industry, will experience an impact of 0.01 to 0.48 
percent of revenues.
    Although this final rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities, the EPA nonetheless 
has tried to reduce the impact of Part 98 on small entities. For 
example, the EPA conducted several meetings with industry associations 
to discuss regulatory options and the corresponding burden on industry, 
such as recordkeeping and reporting. The EPA continues to conduct 
significant outreach on Part 98 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)

    The final rule amendments and confidentiality determinations do not 
contain a federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 
million or more for state, local, and tribal governments, in the 
aggregate, or the private sector in any one year. Thus, the final rule 
amendments and confidentiality determinations are not subject to the 
requirements of section 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
    This final rule is also not subject to the requirements of section 
203 of UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The final rule 
amends specific provisions in subpart A, General Provisions, to reflect 
global warming potentials that have been published by the IPCC. Also in 
this action, the EPA is revising specific provisions to provide clarity 
on what is to be reported. In some cases, the EPA has increased 
flexibility in the selection of methods used for calculating and 
monitoring GHGs. Therefore, this action is not subject to the 
requirements of section 203 of the UMRA.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have 
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between 
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as 
specified in Executive Order 13132.
    The final amendments and confidentiality determinations apply 
directly to facilities that directly emit greenhouses gases or that are 
suppliers of greenhouse gases. They do not apply to governmental 
entities unless the government entity owns a facility that

[[Page 71946]]

directly emits greenhouse gases above threshold levels (such as a 
landfill or large combustion device), so relatively few government 
facilities would be affected. Moreover, for government facilities that 
are subject to the rule, the final revisions will not have a 
significant cost impact. This regulation also does not limit the power 
of States or localities to collect GHG data and/or regulate GHG 
emissions. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this action.
    In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA 
policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local 
governments, the EPA specifically solicited comment on the proposed 
action from State and local officials. The EPA carefully considered the 
comments received in developing this final rule, including providing 
regulatory flexibility for certain municipally-owned solid waste 
landfills under subpart HH.

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

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in 
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). The final 
amendments and confidentiality determinations apply directly to 
facilities that directly emit greenhouses gases or that are suppliers 
of greenhouse gases. They would not have tribal implications unless the 
tribal entity owns a facility that directly emits greenhouse gases 
above threshold levels (such as a landfill or large combustion device). 
Relatively few tribal facilities would be affected. Thus, Executive 
Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

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

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 
1997) as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern health 
or safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of 
the Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This 
action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not 
establish an environmental standard intended to mitigate health or 
safety risks.

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

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 
(May 22, 2001)), because it is not a significant regulatory action 
under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs 
the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory 
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling 
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by 
voluntary consensus standards bodies. NTTAA directs the EPA to provide 
Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use 
available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    This final rule does not involve any new technical standards, but 
allows for greater flexibility for reporters to use consensus standards 
where they are available. Therefore, the EPA did not consider the use 
of specific voluntary consensus standards.

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

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, (February 16, 1994) establishes 
Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision 
directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and 
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission 
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high 
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, 
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income 
populations in the United States.
    The EPA has determined that this final rule will not have 
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not 
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the 
environment because it is a rule addressing information collection and 
reporting procedures.

K. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this rule and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A Major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2). This rule will be effective on January 1, 2014.

List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 98

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Greenhouse gases, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: November 15, 2013.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
    For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, of the 
Code of Federal Regulations is amended 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, et seq.

Subpart A--[Amended]

0
2. Section 98.3 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (c)(1).
0
b. Adding paragraphs (c)(11)(viii) and (c)(13).
0
c. Revising paragraphs (h)(4) and (j)(3)(ii).
0
d. Adding paragraphs (k) and (l).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

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

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) Facility name or supplier name (as appropriate), and physical 
street address of the facility or supplier, including the city, State, 
and zip code. If the facility does not have a physical street address, 
then the facility must provide the latitude and longitude representing 
the geographic centroid or center point of facility operations in 
decimal degree format. This must be provided in a comma-delimited 
``latitude, longitude'' coordinate pair reported in decimal degrees to 
at least four digits to the right of the decimal point.
* * * * *
    (11) * * *
    (viii) The facility or supplier must refer to the reporting 
instructions of the

[[Page 71947]]

electronic GHG reporting tool regarding standardized conventions for 
the naming of a parent company.
* * * * *
    (13) An indication of whether the facility includes one or more 
plant sites that have been assigned a ``plant code'' (as defined under 
Sec.  98.6) by either the Department of Energy's Energy Information 
Administration or by the EPA's Clean Air Markets Division.
* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (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) of this 
section. 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 at least 5 business days 
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 paragraphs (h)(1) or (2) of 
this section within 75 days.
* * * * *
    (j) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (ii) Any subsequent extensions to the original request must be 
submitted to the Administrator within 4 weeks of the owner or operator 
identifying the need to extend the request, but in any event no later 
than 4 weeks before the date for the planned process equipment or unit 
shutdown that was provided in the original or most recently approved 
request.
* * * * *
    (k) Revised global warming potentials and special provisions for 
reporting year 2013. This paragraph (k) applies to owners or operators 
of facilities or suppliers that first become subject to any subpart of 
part 98 solely due to an amendment to Table A-1 of this subpart.
    (1) A facility or supplier that was not subject to any subpart of 
part 98 for reporting year 2012, but first becomes subject to any 
subpart of part 98 due to a change in the GWP for one or more compounds 
in Table A-1 of this subpart, Global Warming Potentials, is not 
required to submit an annual GHG report for reporting year 2013.
    (2) A facility or supplier that is subject to a subpart of part 98 
for reporting year 2012, but first becomes subject to any subpart of 
part 98 due to a change in the GWP for one or more compounds in Table 
A-1 of this subpart, is not required to include those subparts for 
which the facility is subject only due to the change in the GWP in the 
annual GHG report submitted for reporting year 2013.
    (3) Starting on January 1, 2014, facilities or suppliers identified 
in paragraphs (k)(1) or (2) of this section must start monitoring and 
collecting GHG data in compliance with the applicable subparts of part 
98 for which the facility is subject due to the change in the GWP for 
the annual greenhouse gas report for reporting year 2014, which is due 
by March 31, 2015.
    (l) Special provision for best available monitoring methods in 
2014. This paragraph (l) applies to owners or operators of facilities 
or suppliers that first become subject to any subpart of part 98 due to 
an amendment to Table A-1 of this subpart, Global Warming Potentials.
    (1) Best available monitoring methods. From January 1, 2014 to 
March 31, 2014, owners or operators subject to this paragraph (l) may 
use best available monitoring methods for any parameter (e.g., fuel 
use, feedstock rates) that cannot reasonably be measured according to 
the monitoring and QA/QC requirements of a relevant subpart. The owner 
or operator must use the calculation methodologies and equations in the 
``Calculating GHG Emissions'' sections of each relevant subpart, but 
may use the best available monitoring method for any parameter for 
which it is not reasonably feasible to acquire, install, and operate a 
required piece of monitoring equipment by January 1, 2014. Starting no 
later than April 1, 2014, the owner or operator must discontinue using 
best available methods and begin following all applicable monitoring 
and QA/QC requirements of this part, except as provided in paragraph 
(l)(2) of this section. Best available monitoring methods means any of 
the following methods:
    (i) Monitoring methods currently used by the facility that do not 
meet the specifications of a relevant subpart.
    (ii) Supplier data.
    (iii) Engineering calculations.
    (iv) Other company records.
    (2) Requests for extension of the use of best available monitoring 
methods. The owner or operator may submit a request to the 
Administrator to use one or more best available monitoring methods 
beyond March 31, 2014.
    (i) Timing of request. The extension request must be submitted to 
EPA no later than January 31, 2014.
    (ii) Content of request. Requests must contain the following 
information:
    (A) A list of specific items of monitoring instrumentation for 
which the request is being made and the locations where each piece of 
monitoring instrumentation will be installed.
    (B) Identification of the specific rule requirements (by rule 
subpart, section, and paragraph numbers) for which the instrumentation 
is needed.
    (C) A description of the reasons that the needed equipment could 
not be obtained and installed before April 1, 2014.
    (D) If the reason for the extension is that the equipment cannot be 
purchased and delivered by April 1, 2014, supporting documentation such 
as the date the monitoring equipment was ordered, investigation of 
alternative suppliers and the dates by which alternative vendors 
promised delivery, backorder notices or unexpected delays, descriptions 
of actions taken to expedite delivery, and the current expected date of 
delivery.
    (E) If the reason for the extension is that the equipment cannot be 
installed without a process unit shutdown, include supporting 
documentation demonstrating that it is not practicable to isolate the 
equipment and install the monitoring instrument without a full process 
unit shutdown. Include the date of the most recent process unit 
shutdown, the frequency of shutdowns for this process unit, and the 
date of the next planned shutdown during which the monitoring equipment 
can be installed. If there has been a shutdown or if there is a planned 
process unit shutdown between November 29, 2013 and April 1, 2014, 
include a justification of why the equipment could not be obtained and 
installed during that shutdown.
    (F) A description of the specific actions the facility will take to 
obtain and install the equipment as soon as reasonably feasible and the 
expected date by which the equipment will be installed and operating.

[[Page 71948]]

    (iii) Approval criteria. To obtain approval, the owner or operator 
must demonstrate to the Administrator's satisfaction that it is not 
reasonably feasible to acquire, install, and operate a required piece 
of monitoring equipment by April 1, 2014. The use of best available 
methods under this paragraph (l) will not be approved beyond December 
31, 2014.

0
3. Section 98.6 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the definitions for ``Continuous bleed'', ``Degasification 
system'', and ``Intermittent bleed pneumatic devices''.
0
b. Adding the definition of ``Plant code'' in alphabetical order.
0
c. Revising the term ``Ventilation well or shaft'' to read 
``Ventilation hole or shaft'' and revising the definition of the term.
0
d. Revising the definition of ``Ventilation system''.
    The revisions and addition read as follows:

Sec.  98.6  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Continuous bleed means a continuous flow of pneumatic supply 
natural gas to the process control device (e.g. level control, 
temperature control, pressure control) where the supply gas pressure is 
modulated by the process condition, and then flows to the valve 
controller where the signal is compared with the process set-point to 
adjust gas pressure in the valve actuator.
* * * * *
    Degasification system means the entirety of the equipment that is 
used to drain gas from underground coal mines. This includes all 
degasification wells and gob gas vent holes at the underground coal 
mine. Degasification systems include gob and premine surface drainage 
wells, gob and premine in-mine drainage wells, and in-mine gob and 
premine cross-measure borehole wells.
* * * * *
    Intermittent bleed pneumatic devices mean automated flow control 
devices powered by pressurized natural gas and used for automatically 
maintaining a process condition such as liquid level, pressure, delta-
pressure and temperature. These are snap-acting or throttling devices 
that discharge all or a portion of the full volume of the actuator 
intermittently when control action is necessary, but does not bleed 
continuously.
* * * * *
    Plant code means either of the following:
    (1) The Plant ID code assigned by the Department of Energy's Energy 
Information Administration. The Energy Information Administration Plant 
ID code is also referred to as the ``ORIS code'', ``ORISPL code'', 
``Facility ID'', or ``Facility code'', among other names.
    (2) If a Plant ID code has not been assigned by the Department of 
Energy's Energy Information Administration, then plant code means a 
code beginning with ``88'' assigned by the EPA's Clean Air Markets 
Division for electronic reporting.
* * * * *
    Ventilation hole or shaft means a vent hole or shaft employed at an 
underground coal mine to serve as the outlet or conduit to move air 
from the ventilation system out of the mine.
    Ventilation system means a system that is used to control the 
concentration of methane and other gases within mine working areas 
through mine ventilation, rather than a mine degasification system. A 
ventilation system consists of fans that move air through the mine 
workings to dilute methane concentrations.
* * * * *

Sec.  98.7  [Amended]

0
4. Section 98.7 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph (n).

0
5. Table A-1 to Subpart A is revised to read as follows:

                          Table A-1 to Subpart A of Part 98--Global Warming Potentials
                                             [100-Year Time Horizon]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                Global warming
                   Name                           CAS No.             Chemical formula          potential (100
                                                                                                     yr.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carbon dioxide............................            124-38-9                           CO2                   1
Methane...................................             74-82-8                           CH4              \a\ 25
Nitrous oxide.............................          10024-97-2                           N2O             \a\ 298
HFC-23....................................             75-46-7                          CHF3          \a\ 14,800
HFC-32....................................             75-10-5                         CH2F2             \a\ 675
HFC-41....................................            593-53-3                          CH3F              \a\ 92
HFC-125...................................            354-33-6                         C2HF5           \a\ 3,500
HFC-134...................................            359-35-3                        C2H2F4           \a\ 1,100
HFC-134a..................................            811-97-2                       CH2FCF3           \a\ 1,430
HFC-143...................................            430-66-0                        C2H3F3             \a\ 353
HFC-143a..................................            420-46-2                        C2H3F3           \a\ 4,470
HFC-152...................................            624-72-6                      CH2FCH2F                  53
HFC-152a..................................             75-37-6                       CH3CHF2             \a\ 124
HFC-161...................................            353-36-6                       CH3CH2F                  12
HFC-227ea.................................            431-89-0                         C3HF7           \a\ 3,220
HFC-236cb.................................            677-56-5                    CH2FCF2CF3               1,340
HFC-236ea.................................            431-63-0                    CHF2CHFCF3               1,370
HFC-236fa.................................            690-39-1                        C3H2F6           \a\ 9,810
HFC-245ca.................................            679-86-7                        C3H3F5             \a\ 693
HFC-245fa.................................            460-73-1                    CHF2CH2CF3               1,030
HFC-365mfc................................            406-58-6                  CH3CF2CH2CF3                 794
HFC-43-10mee..............................         138495-42-8               CF3CFHCFHCF2CF3           \a\ 1,640
Sulfur hexafluoride.......................           2551-62-4                           SF6          \a\ 22,800
Trifluoromethyl sulphur pentafluoride.....            373-80-8                        SF5CF3              17,700
Nitrogen trifluoride......................           7783-54-2                           NF3              17,200
PFC-14 (Perfluoromethane).................             75-73-0                           CF4           \a\ 7,390
PFC-116 (Perfluoroethane).................             76-16-4                          C2F6          \a\ 12,200
PFC-218 (Perfluoropropane)................             76-19-7                          C3F8           \a\ 8,830
Perfluorocyclopropane.....................            931-91-9                        C-C3F6              17,340
PFC-3-1-10 (Perfluorobutane)..............            355-25-9                         C4F10           \a\ 8,860

[[Page 71949]]

 
PFC-318 (Perfluorocyclobutane)............            115-25-3                        C-C4F8          \a\ 10,300
PFC-4-1-12 (Perfluoropentane).............            678-26-2                         C5F12           \a\ 9,160
PFC-5-1-14 (Perfluorohexane, FC-72).......            355-42-0                         C6F14           \a\ 9,300
PFC-9-1-18................................            306-94-5                        C10F18               7,500
HCFE-235da2 (Isoflurane)..................          26675-46-7                  CHF2OCHClCF3                 350
HFE-43-10pccc (H-Galden 1040x, HG-11).....            E1730133            CHF2OCF2OC2F4OCHF2               1,870
HFE-125...................................           3822-68-2                      CHF2OCF3              14,900
HFE-134 (HG-00)...........................           1691-17-4                     CHF2OCHF2               6,320
HFE-143a..................................            421-14-7                       CH3OCF3                 756
HFE-227ea.................................           2356-62-9                    CF3CHFOCF3               1,540
HFE-236ca12 (HG-10).......................          78522-47-1                 CHF2OCF2OCHF2               2,800
HFE-236ea2 (Desflurane)...................          57041-67-5                   CHF2OCHFCF3                 989
HFE-236fa.................................          20193-67-3                    CF3CH2OCF3                 487
HFE-245cb2................................          22410-44-2                    CH3OCF2CF3                 708
HFE-245fa1................................          84011-15-4                   CHF2CH2OCF3                 286
HFE-245fa2................................           1885-48-9                   CHF2OCH2CF3                 659
HFE-254cb2................................            425-88-7                   CH3OCF2CHF2                 359
HFE-263fb2................................            460-43-5                    CF3CH2OCH3                  11
HFE-329mcc2...............................         134769-21-4                CF3CF2OCF2CHF2                 919
HFE-338mcf2...............................         156053-88-2                 CF3CF2OCH2CF3                 552
HFE-338pcc13 (HG-01)......................         188690-78-0              CHF2OCF2CF2OCHF2               1,500
HFE-347mcc3 (HFE-7000)....................            375-03-1                 CH3OCF2CF2CF3                 575
HFE-347mcf2...............................         171182-95-9                CF3CF2OCH2CHF2                 374
HFE-347pcf2...............................            406-78-0                CHF2CF2OCH2CF3                 580
HFE-356mec3...............................            382-34-3                 CH3OCF2CHFCF3                 101
HFE-356pcc3...............................         160620-20-2                CH3OCF2CF2CHF2                 110
HFE-356pcf2...............................          50807-77-7               CHF2CH2OCF2CHF2                 265
HFE-356pcf3...............................          35042-99-0               CHF2OCH2CF2CHF2                 502
HFE-365mcf3...............................            378-16-5                 CF3CF2CH2OCH3                  11
HFE-374pc2................................            512-51-6                CH3CH2OCF2CHF2                 557
HFE-449s1 (HFE-7100)......................         163702-07-6                      C4F9OCH3                 297
Chemical blend............................         163702-08-7               (CF3)2CFCF2OCH3
HFE-569sf2 (HFE-7200).....................         163702-05-4                     C4F9OC2H5                  59
Chemical blend............................         163702-06-5              (CF3)2CFCF2OC2H5
Sevoflurane (HFE-347mmz1).................          28523-86-6                 CH2FOCH(CF3)2                 345
HFE-356mm1................................          13171-18-1                  (CF3)2CHOCH3                  27
HFE-338mmz1...............................          26103-08-2                 CHF2OCH(CF3)2                 380
(Octafluorotetramethy-lene) hydroxymethyl                   NA              X-(CF2)4CH(OH)-X                  73
 group....................................
HFE-347mmy1...............................          22052-84-2                  CH3OCF(CF3)2                 343
Bis(trifluoromethyl)-methanol.............            920-66-1                    (CF3)2CHOH                 195
2,2,3,3,3-pentafluoropropanol.............            422-05-9                   CF3CF2CH2OH                  42
PFPMIE (HT-70)............................                  NA        CF3OCF(CF3)CF2OCF2OCF3              10,300
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ The GWP for this compound is different than the GWP in the version of Table A-1 to subpart A of part 98
  published on October 30, 2009.

0
6. Table A-6 is amended by removing the entry for 98.466(c)(1) and 
revising the entries for 98.346(d)(1), 98.346(e), 98.346(i)(5), 
98.346(i)(7), and 98.466(d)(3) to read as follows:

   Table A-6 to Subpart A of Part 98--Data Elements that Are Inputs to
  Emission Equations and for Which the Reporting Deadline is March 31,
                                  2013
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Specific data elements for
                                           which reporting date is March
                                            31, 2013 (``All'' means all
       Subpart         Rule citation (40    data elements in the cited
                          CFR part 98)     paragraph are not required to
                                            be reported until March 31,
                                                       2013)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                               * * * * * *
HH...................       98.346(d)(1)  Only degradable organic carbon
                                           (DOC) value, and fraction of
                                           DOC dissimilated (DOCF)
                                           values.
 
                               * * * * * *
HH...................          98.346(e)  Only fraction of CH4 in
                                           landfill gas and methane
                                           correction factor (MCF)
                                           values.
 
                               * * * * * *
HH...................       98.346(i)(5)  Only annual operating hours
                                           for the destruction devices
                                           located at the landfill
                                           facility, and the destruction
                                           efficiency for the
                                           destruction devices
                                           associated with that
                                           measurement location.
 

[[Page 71950]]

 
                               * * * * * *
HH...................       98.346(i)(7)  Only surface area specified in
                                           Table HH-3, estimated gas
                                           collection system efficiency,
                                           and annual operating hours of
                                           the gas collection system for
                                           each measurement locations.
 
                               * * * * * *
TT...................       98.466(d)(3)  Only degradable organic carbon
                                           (DOCx) value for each waste
                                           stream used in calculations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table A-7 to Subpart A of Part 98 [Amended]

0
7. Table A-7 is amended by removing the entries for 98.256(o)(6) and 
98.256(o)(7).

Subpart C--[AMENDED]

0
8. Section 98.33 is amended by adding paragraph (b)(1)(viii) and 
revising paragraphs (b)(3)(ii)(A) and (e)(1)(ii) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.33  Calculating GHG emissions.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (viii) May be used for the combustion of a fuel listed in Table C-1 
if the fuel is combusted in a unit with a maximum rated heat input 
capacity greater than 250 mmBtu/hr (or, pursuant to Sec.  98.36(c)(3), 
in a group of units served by a common supply pipe, having at least one 
unit with a maximum rated heat input capacity greater than 250 mmBtu/
hr), provided that both of the following conditions apply:
    (A) The use of Tier 4 is not required.
    (B) The fuel provides less than 10 percent of the annual heat input 
to the unit, or if Sec.  98.36(c)(3) applies, to the group of units 
served by a common supply pipe.
* * * * *
    (3) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (A) The use of Tier 1 or 2 is permitted, as described in paragraphs 
(b)(1)(iii), (b)(1)(v), (b)(1)(viii), and (b)(2)(ii) of this section.
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (ii) The procedures in paragraph (e)(4) of this section.
* * * * *

0
9. Section 98.36 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (b)(3).
0
b. Adding paragraphs (b)(11), (c)(1)(xi), (c)(2)(x), and (c)(2)(xi).
0
c. Revising the next to last sentence of paragraph (c)(3) introductory 
text.
0
d. Adding paragraphs (c)(3)(x), (d)(1)(x), (d)(2)(ii)(J), and 
(d)(2)(iii)(J).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  98.36  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) Maximum rated heat input capacity of the unit, in mmBtu/hr.
* * * * *
    (11) If applicable, the plant code (as defined in Sec.  98.6).
    (c) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (xi) If applicable, the plant code (as defined in Sec.  98.6).
    (2) * * *
    (x) Reserved.
    (xi) If applicable, the plant code (as defined in Sec.  98.6).
    (3) * * * As a second example, in accordance with Sec.  
98.33(b)(1)(v), Tier 1 may be used regardless of unit size when natural 
gas is transported through the common pipe, if the annual fuel 
consumption is obtained from gas billing records in units of therms or 
mmBtu. * * *
* * * * *
    (x) If applicable, the plant code (as defined in Sec.  98.6).
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (x) If applicable, the plant code (as defined in Sec.  98.6).
    (2) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (J) If applicable, the plant code (as defined in Sec.  98.6).
    (iii) * * *
    (J) If applicable, the plant code (as defined in Sec.  98.6).
* * * * *

0
10. Table C-1 to Subpart C is revised to read as follows:

   Table C-1 to Subpart C--Default CO2 Emission Factors and High Heat
                    Values for Various Types of Fuel
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Default high heat       Default CO2
           Fuel type                    value           emission  factor
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Coal and coke             mmBtu/short ton        kg CO2/mmBtu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anthracite....................  25.09................  103.69
Bituminous....................  24.93................  93.28
Subbituminous.................  17.25................  97.17
Lignite.......................  14.21................  97.72
Coal Coke.....................  24.80................  113.67
Mixed (Commercial sector).....  21.39................  94.27
Mixed (Industrial coking).....  26.28................  93.90
Mixed (Industrial sector).....  22.35................  94.67
Mixed (Electric Power sector).  19.73................  95.52
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 71951]]

 
          Natural gas                 mmBtu/scf           kg CO2/mmBtu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Weighted U.S. Average)             1.026 x 10-\3\           53.06
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Petroleum products             mmBtu/gallon         kg CO2/mmBtu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distillate Fuel Oil No. 1.....  0.139................  73.25
Distillate Fuel Oil No. 2.....  0.138................  73.96
Distillate Fuel Oil No. 4.....  0.146................  75.04
Residual Fuel Oil No. 5.......  0.140................  72.93
Residual Fuel Oil No. 6.......  0.150................  75.10
Used Oil......................  0.138................  74.00
Kerosene......................  0.135................  75.20
Liquefied petroleum gases       0.092................  61.71
 (LPG) \1\.
Propane \1\...................  0.091................  62.87
Propylene \2\.................  0.091................  67.77
Ethane \1\....................  0.068................  59.60
Ethanol.......................  0.084................  68.44
Ethylene \2\..................  0.058................  65.96
Isobutane \1\.................  0.099................  64.94
Isobutylene \1\...............  0.103................  68.86
Butane \1\....................  0.103................  64.77
Butylene \1\..................  0.105................  68.72
Naphtha (<401 deg F)..........  0.125................  68.02
Natural Gasoline..............  0.110................  66.88
Other Oil (>401 deg F)........  0.139................  76.22
Pentanes Plus.................  0.110................  70.02
Petrochemical Feedstocks......  0.125................  71.02
Petroleum Coke................  0.143................  102.41
Special Naphtha...............  0.125................  72.34
Unfinished Oils...............  0.139................  74.54
Heavy Gas Oils................  0.148................  74.92
Lubricants....................  0.144................  74.27
Motor Gasoline................  0.125................  70.22
Aviation Gasoline.............  0.120................  69.25
Kerosene-Type Jet Fuel........  0.135................  72.22
Asphalt and Road Oil..........  0.158................  75.36
Crude Oil.....................  0.138................  74.54
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Other fuels--solid           mmBtu/short ton        kg CO2/mmBtu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Municipal Solid Waste.........  9.95 \3\.............  90.7
Tires.........................  28.00................  85.97
Plastics......................  38.00................  75.00
Petroleum Coke................  30.00................  102.41
------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Other fuels--gaseous             mmBtu/scf           kg CO2/mmBtu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blast Furnace Gas.............  0.092 x 10-\3\.......  274.32
Coke Oven Gas.................  0.599 x 10-\3\.......  46.85
Propane Gas...................  2.516 x 10-\3\.......  61.46
Fuel Gas \4\..................  1.388 x 10-\3\.......  59.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Biomass fuels--solid          mmBtu/short ton        kg CO2/mmBtu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wood and Wood Residuals (dry    17.48................  93.80
 basis) \5\.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agricultural Byproducts.......  8.25.................  118.17
Peat..........................  8.00.................  111.84
Solid Byproducts..............  10.39................  105.51
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 71952]]

 
    Biomass fuels--gaseous            mmBtu/scf           kg CO2/mmBtu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Landfill Gas..................  0.485 x 10-\3\.......  52.07
Other Biomass Gases...........  0.655 x 10-\3\.......  52.07
------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Biomass Fuels--Liquid           mmBtu/gallon         kg CO2/mmBtu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ethanol.......................  0.084................  68.44
Biodiesel (100%)..............  0.128................  73.84
Rendered Animal Fat...........  0.125................  71.06
Vegetable Oil.................  0.120................  81.55
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The HHV for components of LPG determined at 60 [deg]F and saturation
  pressure with the exception of ethylene.
\2\ Ethylene HHV determined at 41 [deg]F (5 [deg]C) and saturation
  pressure.
\3\ Use of this default HHV is allowed only for: (a) Units that combust
  MSW, do not generate steam, and are allowed to use Tier 1; (b) units
  that derive no more than 10 percent of their annual heat input from
  MSW and/or tires; and (c) small batch incinerators that combust no
  more than 1,000 tons of MSW per year.
\4\ Reporters subject to subpart X of this part that are complying with
  Sec.   98.243(d) or subpart Y of this part may only use the default
  HHV and the default CO2 emission factor for fuel gas combustion under
  the conditions prescribed in Sec.   98.243(d)(2)(i) and (d)(2)(ii) and
  Sec.   98.252(a)(1) and (a)(2), respectively. Otherwise, reporters
  subject to subpart X or subpart Y shall use either Tier 3 (Equation C-
  5) or Tier 4.
\5\ Use the following formula to calculate a wet basis HHV for use in
  Equation C-1: HHVw = ((100 - M)/100)*HHVd where HHVw = wet basis HHV,
  M = moisture content (percent) and HHVd = dry basis HHV from Table C-
  1.

0
11. Table C-2 to Subpart C is revised to read as follows:

Table C-2 to Subpart C--Default CH4 and N2O Emission Factors for Various
                              Types of Fuel
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Default CH4          Default N2O
           Fuel type             emission factor (kg    emission factor
                                      CH4/mmBtu)        (kg N2O/mmBtu)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coal and Coke (All fuel types    1.1 x 10-\02\......  1.6 x 10-\03\
 in Table C-1).
Natural Gas....................  1.0 x 10-\03\......  1.0 x 10-\04\
Petroleum (All fuel types in     3.0 x 10-\03\......  6.0 x 10-\04\
 Table C-1).
Fuel Gas.......................  3.0 x 10-\03\......  6.0 x 10-\04\
Municipal Solid Waste..........  3.2 x 10-\02\......  4.2 x 10-\03\
Tires..........................  3.2 x 10-\02\......  4.2 x 10-\03\
Blast Furnace Gas..............  2.2 x 10-\05\......  1.0 x 10-\04\
Coke Oven Gas..................  4.8 x 10-\04\......  1.0 x 10-\04\
Biomass Fuels--Solid (All fuel   3.2 x 10-\02\......  4.2 x 10-\03\
 types in Table C-1, except
 wood and wood residuals).
Wood and wood residuals........  7.2 x 10-\03\......  3.6 x 10-\03\
Biomass Fuels--Gaseous (All      3.2 x 10-\03\......  6.3 x 10-\04\
 fuel types in Table C-1).
Biomass Fuels--Liquid (All fuel  1.1 x 10-\03\......  1.1 x 10-\04\
 types in Table C-1).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Those employing this table are assumed to fall under the IPCC
  definitions of the ``Energy Industry'' or ``Manufacturing Industries
  and Construction''. In all fuels except for coal the values for these
  two categories are identical. For coal combustion, those who fall
  within the IPCC ``Energy Industry'' category may employ a value of 1g
  of CH4/mmBtu.

Subpart E--[AMENDED]

0
12. Section 98.53 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (b)(3) and paragraph (d) introductory text.
0
b. Revising paragraph (e) and Equation E-2 in paragraph (e).
0
c. Revising the parameters ``DF'' and ``AF'' of Equation E-3a in 
paragraph (g)(1).
0
d. Revising the parameters ``DF1'', ``AF1'', 
``DF2'', ``AF2'', ``DFN'', and 
``AFN'' of Equation E-3b in paragraph (g)(2).
0
e. Revising the parameters ``DFN'', ``AFN'', and 
``FCN'' of Equation E-3c in paragraph (g)(3).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.53  Calculating GHG emissions.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) You must measure the adipic acid production rate during the 
test and calculate the production rate for the test period in tons per 
hour.
* * * * *
    (d) If the adipic acid production unit exhausts to any 
N2O abatement technology ``N'', you must determine the 
destruction efficiency according to paragraphs (d)(1), (d)(2), or 
(d)(3) of this section.
* * * * *
    (e) If the adipic acid production unit exhausts to any 
N2O abatement technology ``N'', you must determine the 
annual amount of adipic acid produced while N2O abatement 
technology ``N'' is operating according to Sec.  98.54(f). Then you 
must calculate the abatement factor for N2O abatement 
technology ``N'' according to Equation E-2 of this section.

[[Page 71953]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29NO13.012

* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    (1) * * *
* * * * *
DF = Destruction efficiency of N2O abatement technology 
``N'' (decimal fraction of N2O removed from vent stream).
AF = Abatement utilization factor of N2O abatement 
technology ``N'' (decimal fraction of time that the abatement 
technology is operating).
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
* * * * *
DF1 = Destruction efficiency of N2O abatement 
technology 1 (decimal fraction of N2O removed from vent 
stream).
AF1 = Abatement utilization factor of N2O 
abatement technology 1 (decimal fraction of time that abatement 
technology 1 is operating).
DF2 = Destruction efficiency of N2O abatement 
technology 2 (decimal fraction of N2O removed from vent 
stream).
AF2 = Abatement utilization factor of N2O 
abatement technology 2 (decimal fraction of time that abatement 
technology 2 is operating).
DFN = Destruction efficiency of N2O abatement 
technology ``N'' (decimal fraction of N2O removed from 
vent stream).
AFN = Abatement utilization factor of N2O 
abatement technology ``N'' (decimal fraction of time that abatement 
technology N is operating).
* * * * *
    (3) * * *
* * * * *
DFN = Destruction efficiency of N2O abatement 
technology ``N'' (decimal fraction of N2O removed from 
vent stream).
AFN = Abatement utilization factor of N2O 
abatement technology ``N'' (decimal fraction of time that the 
abatement technology is operating).
FCN = Fraction control factor of N2O abatement 
technology ``N'' (decimal fraction of total emissions from unit 
``z'' that are sent to abatement technology ``N'').
* * * * *

0
13. Section 98.54 is amended by revising paragraphs (e) and (f) to read 
as follows:

Sec.  98.54  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

* * * * *
    (e) You must determine the monthly amount of adipic acid produced. 
You must also determine the monthly amount of adipic acid produced 
during which N2O abatement technology is operating. These 
monthly amounts are determined according to the methods in paragraphs 
(c)(1) or (c)(2) of this section.
    (f) You must determine the annual amount of adipic acid produced. 
You must also determine the annual amount of adipic acid produced 
during which N2O abatement technology is operating. These 
are determined by summing the respective monthly adipic acid production 
quantities determined in paragraph (e) of this section.

Subpart G--[AMENDED]

0
14. Section 98.73 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (b)(4) introductory text and revising Equation G-
4.
0
b. Revising Equation G-5 and by removing parameter ``n'' of Equation G-
5 and adding in its place parameter ``j''.
0
c. Revising the parameter ``ECO2k'' of Equation G-5 in 
paragraph (b)(5).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.73  Calculating GHG emissions.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) You must calculate the annual process CO2 emissions 
from each ammonia processing unit k at your facility according to 
Equation G-4 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29NO13.027

* * * * *
    (5) * * *
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29NO13.013
    
* * * * *
ECO2k = Annual CO2 emissions from each ammonia 
processing unit k (metric tons).
* * * * *
j = Total number of ammonia processing units.
* * * * *

0
15. Section 98.75 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.75  Procedures for estimating missing data.

* * * * *
    (b) For missing feedstock supply rates used to determine monthly 
feedstock consumption, you must determine the best available 
estimate(s) of the parameter(s), based on all available process data.

0
16. Section 98.76 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) introductory 
text, (b) introductory text, and (b)(13) 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) 
and (2) of this section:
* * * * *
    (b) If a CEMS is not used to measure emissions, then you must 
report all of the following information in this paragraph (b):
* * * * *
    (13) Annual CO2 emissions (metric tons) from the steam 
reforming of a hydrocarbon or the gasification of solid and liquid raw 
material at the ammonia manufacturing process unit used to produce urea 
and the method used to determine the CO2 consumed in urea 
production.

Subpart H--[AMENDED]

0
17. Section 98.86 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as 
follows:

[[Page 71954]]

Sec.  98.86  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (2) Annual facility cement production.
* * * * *

Subpart I--[AMENDED]

0
18. Section 98.96 is amended by revising paragraph (y)(3)(i) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.96  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (y) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) The testing of tools to determine the potential effect on 
current utilization and by-product formation rates and destruction or 
removal efficiency values under the new conditions.
* * * * *

Subpart K--[AMENDED]

0
19. Section 98.113 is amended by revising Equation K-3 and by removing 
the parameter ``2000/2205'' of Equation K-3 and adding in its place the 
parameter ``2/2205'' to read as follows:

Sec.  98.113  Calculating GHG emissions.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) * * *
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29NO13.014
    
* * * * *

2/2205 = Conversion factor to convert kg CH4/ton of 
product to metric tons CH4.

* * * * *

0
20. Section 98.116 is amended by adding paragraph (e)(2) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.116  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (2) Annual process CH4 emissions (in metric tons) from 
each EAF used for the production of any ferroalloy listed in Table K-1 
of this subpart.
* * * * *

Subpart L--[AMENDED]

0
21. Section 98.126 is amended by revising paragraphs (j) introductory 
text, (j)(1), and (j)(3)(i) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.126  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (j) Special provisions for reporting years 2011, 2012, and 2013 
only. For reporting years 2011, 2012, and 2013, the owner or operator 
of a facility must comply with paragraphs (j)(1), (j)(2), and (j)(3) of 
this section.
    (1) Timing. The owner or operator of a facility is not required to 
report the data elements at Sec.  98.3(c)(4)(iii) and paragraphs 
(a)(2), (a)(3), (a)(4), (a)(6), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), and (h) 
of this section until the later of March 31, 2015 or the date set forth 
for that data element at Sec.  98.3(c)(4)(vii) and Table A-7 of Subpart 
A of this part.
* * * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) If you choose to use a default GWP rather than your best 
estimate of the GWP for fluorinated GHGs whose GWPs are not listed in 
Table A-1 of Subpart A of this part, use a default GWP of 10,000 for 
fluorinated GHGs that are fully fluorinated GHGs and use a default GWP 
of 2000 for other fluorinated GHGs.
* * * * *

Subpart N--[AMENDED]

0
22. Section 98.143 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the introductory text.
0
b. Revising paragraph (b) introductory text.
0
c. Revising the parameters ``MFi'' and ``Fi'' of 
Equation N-1 in paragraph (b)(2)(iv).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.143  Calculating GHG emissions.

    You must calculate and report the annual process CO2 
emissions from each continuous glass melting furnace using the 
procedure in paragraphs (a) through (c) of this section.
* * * * *
    (b) For each continuous glass melting furnace that is not subject 
to the requirements in paragraph (a) of this section, calculate and 
report the process and combustion CO2 emissions from the 
glass melting furnace by using either the procedure in paragraph (b)(1) 
of this section or the procedure in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, 
except as specified in paragraph (c) of this section.
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iv) * * *
* * * * *
MFi = Annual average decimal mass fraction of carbonate-
based mineral i in carbonate-based raw material i.
* * * * *
Fi = Decimal fraction of calcination achieved for 
carbonate-based raw material i, assumed to be equal to 1.0.
* * * * *

0
23. Section 98.144 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.144  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) 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 (incorporated by 
reference, see Sec.  98.7) 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 (incorporated by reference, see 
Sec.  98.7).
* * * * *

0
24. Section 98.146 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(4), (6), and 
(7) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.146  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) Carbonate-based mineral decimal mass fraction for each 
carbonate-based raw material charged to a continuous glass melting 
furnace.
* * * * *
    (6) The decimal fraction of calcination achieved for each 
carbonate-based raw material, if a value other than 1.0 is used to 
calculate process mass emissions of CO2.
    (7) Method used to determine decimal fraction of calcination.
* * * * *

0
25. Section 98.147 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(5) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.147  Records that must be retained.

* * * * *

[[Page 71955]]

    (b) * * *
    (5) The decimal fraction of calcination achieved for each 
carbonate-based raw material, if a value other than 1.0 is used to 
calculate process mass emissions of CO2.
* * * * *

Subpart O--[AMENDED]

0
26. Section 98.153 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (c) introductory text.
0
b. Revising paragraph (d) introductory text.
0
c. Revising the parameter ``ED'' of Equation O-5 in 
paragraph (d).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.153  Calculating GHG emissions.

* * * * *
    (c) For HCFC-22 production facilities that do not use a destruction 
device or that have a destruction device that is not directly connected 
to the HCFC-22 production equipment, HFC-23 emissions shall be 
estimated using Equation O-4 of this section:
* * * * *
    (d) For HCFC-22 production facilities that use a destruction device 
connected to the HCFC-22 production equipment, HFC-23 emissions shall 
be estimated using Equation O-5 of this section:
* * * * *
ED = Mass of HFC-23 emitted annually from destruction 
device (metric tons), calculated using Equation O-8 of this section.
* * * * *

0
27. Section 98.154 is amended by revising paragraph (j) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.154  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

* * * * *
    (j) The number of sources of equipment type t with screening values 
less than 10,000 ppmv shall be the difference between the number of 
leak sources of equipment type t that could emit HFC-23 and the number 
of sources of equipment type t with screening values greater than or 
equal to 10,000 ppmv as determined under paragraph (i) of this section.
* * * * *

0
28. Section 98.156 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.156  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (c) Each HFC-23 destruction facility shall report the concentration 
(mass fraction) of HFC-23 measured at the outlet of the destruction 
device during the facility's annual HFC-23 concentration measurements 
at the outlet of the device. If the concentration of HFC-23 is below 
the detection limit of the measuring device, report the detection limit 
and that the concentration is below the detection limit.
* * * * *

Subpart P--[AMENDED]

0
29. Section 98.163 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (b) introductory text.
0
b. Revising the parameters ``Fdstkn'', ``CCn'', 
and ``MWn'' of Equation P-1 in paragraph (b)(1).
0
c. Revising the parameters ``Fdstkn'' and ``CCn'' 
of Equation P-2 in paragraph (b)(2).
0
d. Revising the parameters ``Fdstkn'' and ``CCn'' 
of Equation P-3 in paragraph (b)(3).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.163  Calculating GHG emissions.

* * * * *
    (b) Fuel and feedstock material balance approach. Calculate and 
report CO2 emissions as the sum of the annual emissions 
associated with each fuel and feedstock used for hydrogen production by 
following paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this section. The carbon 
content and molecular weight shall be obtained from the analyses 
conducted in accordance with Sec.  98.164(b)(2), (b)(3), or (b)(4), as 
applicable, or from the missing data procedures in Sec.  98.165. If the 
analyses are performed annually, then the annual value shall be used as 
the monthly average. If the analyses are performed more frequently than 
monthly, use the arithmetic average of values obtained during the month 
as the monthly average.
    (1) * * *
* * * * *
Fdstkn = Volume or mass of the gaseous fuel or feedstock 
used in month n (scf (at standard conditions of 68[emsp14][deg]F and 
atmospheric pressure) or kg of fuel or feedstock).
CCn = Average carbon content of the gaseous fuel or 
feedstock for month n (kg carbon per kg of fuel or feedstock).
MWn = Average molecular weight of the gaseous fuel or 
feedstock for month n (kg/kg-mole). If you measure mass, the term 
``MWn/MVC'' is replaced with ``1''.
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
* * * * *
Fdstkn = Volume or mass of the liquid fuel or feedstock 
used in month n (gallons or kg of fuel or feedstock).
CCn = Average carbon content of the liquid fuel or 
feedstock, for month n (kg carbon per gallon or kg of fuel or 
feedstock).
* * * * *
    (3) * * *
* * * * *
Fdstkn = Mass of solid fuel or feedstock used in month n 
(kg of fuel or feedstock).
CCn = Average carbon content of the solid fuel or 
feedstock, for month n (kg carbon per kg of fuel or feedstock).
* * * * *

0
30. Section 98.164 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (b)(3), (b)(4), and (b)(5) introductory text.
0
b. Removing paragraphs (c) and (d).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.164  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) Determine the carbon content of fuel oil, naphtha, and other 
liquid fuels and feedstocks at least monthly, except annually for 
standard liquid hydrocarbon fuels and feedstocks having consistent 
composition, or upon delivery for liquid fuels and feedstocks delivered 
by bulk transport (e.g., by truck or rail).
    (4) Determine the carbon content of coal, coke, and other solid 
fuels and feedstocks at least monthly, except annually for standard 
solid hydrocarbon fuels and feedstocks having consistent composition, 
or upon delivery for solid fuels and feedstocks delivered by bulk 
transport (e.g., by truck or rail).
    (5) You must use the following applicable methods to determine the 
carbon content for all fuels and feedstocks, and molecular weight of 
gaseous fuels and feedstocks. Alternatively, you may use the results of 
chromatographic analysis of the fuel and feedstock, provided that the 
chromatograph is operated, maintained, and calibrated according to the 
manufacturer's instructions; and the methods used for operation, 
maintenance, and calibration of the chromatograph are documented in the 
written monitoring plan for the unit under Sec.  98.3(g)(5).
* * * * *

0
31. Section 98.166 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(2), (a)(3), 
(b)(2), and (b)(5) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.166  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (2) Annual quantity of hydrogen produced (metric tons) for each 
process unit.
    (3) Annual quantity of ammonia produced (metric tons), if 
applicable, for each process unit.
    (b) * * *
    (2) Monthly consumption of each fuel and feedstock used for 
hydrogen production and its type (scf or kg of gaseous fuels and 
feedstocks, gallons or

[[Page 71956]]

kg of liquid fuels and feedstocks, kg of solid fuels and feedstocks).
* * * * *
    (5) Monthly analyses of carbon content for each fuel and feedstock 
used in hydrogen production (kg carbon/kg of gaseous and solid fuels 
and feedstocks, kg carbon per gallon or kg of liquid fuels and 
feedstocks).
* * * * *

0
32. Section 98.167 is amended by adding paragraphs (c) and (d) to read 
as follows:

Sec.  98.167  Records that must be retained.

* * * * *
    (c) For units using the calculation methodologies described in 
Sec.  98.163(b), the records required under Sec.  98.3(g) must include 
both the company records and a detailed explanation of how company 
records are used to estimate the following:
    (1) Fuel and feedstock consumption, when solid fuel and feedstock 
is combusted and a CEMS is not used to measure GHG emissions.
    (2) Fossil fuel consumption, when, pursuant to Sec.  98.33(e), the 
owner or operator of a unit that uses CEMS to quantify CO2 
emissions and that combusts both fossil and biogenic fuels separately 
reports the biogenic portion of the total annual CO2 
emissions.
    (3) Sorbent usage, if the methodology in Sec.  98.33(d) is used to 
calculate CO2 emissions from sorbent.
    (d) The owner or operator must document the procedures used to 
ensure the accuracy of the estimates of fuel and feedstock usage and 
sorbent usage (as applicable) in Sec.  98.163(b), including, but not 
limited to, calibration of weighing equipment, fuel and feedstock flow 
meters, and other measurement devices. The estimated accuracy of 
measurements made with these devices must also be recorded, and the 
technical basis for these estimates must be provided.

Subpart Q--[AMENDED]

0
33. Section 98.170 is amended by revising the first sentence to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.170  Definition of the source category.

    The iron and steel production source category includes facilities 
with any of the following processes: taconite iron ore processing, 
integrated iron and steel manufacturing, cokemaking not collocated with 
an integrated iron and steel manufacturing process, direct reduction 
furnaces not collocated with an integrated iron and steel manufacturing 
process, and electric arc furnace (EAF) steelmaking not collocated with 
an integrated iron and steel manufacturing process. * * *

0
34. Section 98.173 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the parameters ``(Fs)'', ``(Csf)'', 
``(Fg)'', ``(Fl)'', ``(C0)'', 
``(Cp)'', and ``(CR)'' of Equation Q-1 in 
paragraph (b)(1)(i).
0
b. Revising the parameters ``(CIron)'', 
``(CScrap)'', ``(CFlux)'', 
``(CCarbon)'', ``(CSteel)'', 
``(CSlag)'', and ``(CR)'' of Equation Q-2 in 
paragraph (b)(1)(ii).
0
c. Revising the parameters ``(CCoal)'', 
``(CCoke)'', and ``(CR)'' of Equation Q-3 in 
paragraph (b)(1)(iii).
0
d. Revising the parameters ``(Fg)'', ``(CFeed)'', 
``(CSinter)'', and ``(CR)'' of Equation Q-4 in 
paragraph (b)(1)(iv).
0
e. Revising Equation Q-5 and the definitions in Equation Q-5 in 
paragraph (b)(1)(v).
0
f. Revising Equation Q-6 and revising the parameters 
``(CSteelin)'', ``(CSteelout)'', and 
``(CR)'' of Equation Q-6 in paragraph (b)(1)(vi).
0
g. Revising the parameters ``(Fg)'', ``(COre)'', 
``(CCarbon)'', ``(COther)'', 
``(CIron)'', ``(CNM)'', and ``(CR)'' 
of Equation Q-7 in paragraph (b)(1)(vii).
0
h. Revising paragraphs (c) and (d).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.173  Calculating GHG emissions.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) * * *
* * * * *
(Fs) = Annual mass of the solid fuel used (metric tons).
(Csf) = Carbon content of the solid fuel, from the fuel 
analysis (expressed as a decimal fraction).
(Fg) = Annual volume of the gaseous fuel used (scf).
* * * * *
(Fl) = Annual volume of the liquid fuel used (gallons).
* * * * *
(C0) = Carbon content of the greenball (taconite) 
pellets, from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal 
fraction).
* * * * *
(Cp) = Carbon content of the fired pellets, from the 
carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction).
* * * * *
(CR) = Carbon content of the air pollution control 
residue, from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal 
fraction).

    (ii) * * *
* * * * *
(CIron) = Carbon content of the molten iron, from the 
carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction).
* * * * *
(CScrap) = Carbon content of the ferrous scrap, from the 
carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction).
* * * * *
(CFlux) = Carbon content of the flux materials, from the 
carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction).
* * * * *
(CCarbon) = Carbon content of the carbonaceous materials, 
from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction).
* * * * *
(CSteel) = Carbon content of the steel, from the carbon 
analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction).
* * * * *
(CSlag) = Carbon content of the slag, from the carbon 
analysis (expressed as a decimal fraction).
* * * * *
(CR) = Carbon content of the air pollution control 
residue, from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal 
fraction).

    (iii) * * *
* * * * *
(CCoal) = Carbon content of the coal, from the carbon 
analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction).
* * * * *
(CCoke) = Carbon content of the coke, from the carbon 
analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction).
* * * * *
(CR) = Carbon content of the air pollution control 
residue, from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal 
fraction).

    (iv) * * *
* * * * *
(Fg) = Annual volume of the gaseous fuel used (scf).
* * * * *
(CFeed) = Carbon content of the mixed sinter feed 
materials that form the bed entering the sintering machine, from the 
carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction).
* * * * *
(CSinter) = Carbon content of the sinter pellets, from 
the carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction).
* * * * *
(CR) = Carbon content of the air pollution control 
residue, from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal 
fraction).
    (v) For EAFs, estimate CO2 emissions using Equation Q-5 
of this section.

[[Page 71957]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29NO13.015

Where:
CO2 = Annual CO2 mass emissions from the EAF 
(metric tons).
44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to carbon.
(Iron) = Annual mass of direct reduced iron (if any) charged to the 
furnace (metric tons).
(CIron) = Carbon content of the direct reduced iron, from 
the carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction).
(Scrap) = Annual mass of ferrous scrap charged to the furnace 
(metric tons).
(CScrap) = Carbon content of the ferrous scrap, from the 
carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction).
(Flux) = Annual mass of flux materials (e.g., limestone, dolomite) 
charged to the furnace (metric tons).
(CFlux) = Carbon content of the flux materials, from the 
carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction).
(Electrode) = Annual mass of carbon electrode consumed (metric 
tons).
(CElectrode) = Carbon content of the carbon electrode, 
from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction).
(Carbon) = Annual mass of carbonaceous materials (e.g., coal, coke) 
charged to the furnace (metric tons).
(CCarbon) = Carbon content of the carbonaceous materials, 
from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction).
(Steel) = Annual mass of molten raw steel produced by the furnace 
(metric tons).
(CSteel) = Carbon content of the steel, from the carbon 
analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction).
(Fg) = Annual volume of the gaseous fuel used (scf at 60 
degrees F and one atmosphere).
(Cgf) = Average carbon content of the gaseous fuel, from 
the fuel analysis results (kg C per kg of fuel).
(MW) = Molecular weight of the gaseous fuel (kg/kg-mole).
(MVC) = Molar volume conversion factor (836.6 scf per kg-mole at 
standard conditions of 60 degrees F and one atmosphere).
(0.001) = Conversion factor from kg to metric tons.
(Slag) = Annual mass of slag produced by the furnace (metric tons).
(CSlag) = Carbon content of the slag, from the carbon 
analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction).
(R) = Annual mass of air pollution control residue collected (metric 
tons).
(CR) = Carbon content of the air pollution control 
residue, from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal 
fraction).

    (vi) * * *
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29NO13.016
    
* * * * *
(CSteelin) = Carbon content of the molten steel before 
decarburization, from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a 
decimal fraction).
(CSteelout) = Carbon content of the molten steel after 
decarburization, from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a 
decimal fraction).
* * * * *
(CR) = Carbon content of the air pollution control 
residue, from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal 
fraction).

    (vii) * * *
* * * * *
(Fg) = Annual volume of the gaseous fuel used (scf).
* * * * *
(COre) = Carbon content of the iron ore or iron ore 
pellets, from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal 
fraction).
* * * * *
(CCarbon) = Carbon content of the carbonaceous materials, 
from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction).
* * * * *
(COther) = Average carbon content of the other materials 
charged to the furnace, from the carbon analysis results (expressed 
as a decimal fraction).
* * * * *
(CIron) = Carbon content of the iron, from the carbon 
analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction).
* * * * *
(CNM) = Carbon content of the non-metallic materials, 
from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal fraction).
* * * * *
(CR) = Carbon content of the air pollution control 
residue, from the carbon analysis results (expressed as a decimal 
fraction).
* * * * *
    (c) You must determine emissions of CO2 from the coke 
pushing process in mtCO2e by multiplying the metric tons of 
coal charged to the by-product recovery and non-recovery coke ovens 
during the reporting period by 0.008.
    (d) If GHG emissions from a taconite indurating furnace, basic 
oxygen furnace, non-recovery coke oven battery, sinter process, EAF, 
decarburization vessel, or direct reduction furnace are vented through 
a stack equipped with a CEMS that complies with the Tier 4 methodology 
in subpart C of this part, or through the same stack as any combustion 
unit or process equipment that reports CO2 emissions using a 
CEMS that complies with the Tier 4 Calculation Methodology in subpart C 
of this part (General Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources), then the 
calculation methodology in paragraph (b) of this section shall not be 
used to calculate process emissions. The owner or operator shall report 
under this subpart the combined stack emissions according to the Tier 4 
Calculation Methodology in Sec.  98.33(a)(4) and comply with all 
associated requirements for Tier 4 in subpart C of this part (General 
Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources).

0
35. Section 98.174 is amended by adding a sentence to the end of 
paragraph (b)(1) and revising paragraph (c)(2) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.174  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * * No determination of the mass of steel output from 
decarburization vessels is required.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2)(i) For the exhaust from basic oxygen furnaces, EAFs, 
decarburization vessels, and direct reduction furnaces, sample the 
furnace exhaust for at least three complete production cycles that 
start when the furnace is being charged and end after steel or iron and 
slag have

[[Page 71958]]

been tapped. For EAFs that produce both carbon steel and stainless or 
specialty (low carbon) steel, develop an emission factor for the 
production of both types of steel.
    (ii) For the exhaust from continuously charged EAFs, sample the 
exhaust for a period spanning at least three hours. For EAFs that 
produce both carbon steel and stainless or specialty (low carbon) 
steel, develop an emission factor for the production of both types of 
steel.
* * * * *

0
36. Section 98.175 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.175  Procedures for estimating missing data.

* * * * *
    (a) Except as provided in Sec.  98.174(b)(4), 100 percent data 
availability is required for the carbon content of inputs and outputs 
for facilities that estimate emissions using the carbon mass balance 
procedure in Sec.  98.173(b)(1) or facilities that estimate emissions 
using the site-specific emission factor procedure in Sec.  
98.173(b)(2).
* * * * *

0
37. Section 98.176 is amended by revising paragraph (e) introductory 
text to read as follows:

Sec.  98.176  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (e) If you use the carbon mass balance method in Sec.  98.173(b)(1) 
to determine CO2 emissions, you must, except as provided in 
Sec.  98.174(b)(4), report the following information for each process:
* * * * *

0
38. Section 98.177 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.177  Records that must be retained.

* * * * *
    (b) When the carbon mass balance method is used to estimate 
emissions for a process, the monthly mass of each process input and 
output that are used to determine the annual mass, except that no 
determination of the mass of steel output from decarburization vessels 
is required.
* * * * *

Subpart S--[AMENDED]

0
39. Section 98.190 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.190  Definition of the source category.

    (a) Lime manufacturing plants (LMPs) engage in the manufacture of a 
lime product by calcination of limestone, dolomite, shells or other 
calcareous substances as defined in 40 CFR 63.7081(a)(1).
* * * * *

0
40. Section 98.193 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a).
0
b. Revising paragraph (b)(1).
0
c. Revising paragraph (b)(2) introductory text.
0
d. Revising paragraph (b)(2)(ii) introductory text.
0
e. Revising the parameters ``EFLKD,i,n'', 
``CaOLKD,i,n'' and ``MgOLKD,i,n'' of Equation S-2 
in paragraph (b)(2)(ii).
0
f. Revising paragraph (b)(2)(iii) introductory text.
0
g. Revising the parameters ``Ewaste,i'', 
``CaOwaste,i'', ``MgOwaste,i'', and 
``Mwaste,i'' of Equation S-3 in paragraph (b)(2)(iii).
0
h. Revising paragraph (b)(2)(iv) introductory text.
0
i. Revising the parameters ``ECO2'', 
``EFLKD,i,n'', ``MLKD,i,n'', 
``Ewaste,i'', ``b'' and ``z'' of Equation S-4 in paragraph 
(b)(2)(iv).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.193  Calculating GHG emissions.

* * * * *
    (a) If all lime kilns meet the conditions specified in Sec.  
98.33(b)(4)(ii) or (iii), you must calculate and report under this 
subpart the combined process and combustion CO2 emissions 
from all lime kilns by operating and maintaining a CEMS to measure 
CO2 emissions according to the Tier 4 Calculation 
Methodology specified in Sec.  98.33(a)(4) and all associated 
requirements for Tier 4 in subpart C of this part (General Stationary 
Fuel Combustion Sources).
    (b) * * *
    (1) Calculate and report under this subpart the combined process 
and combustion CO2 emissions from all lime kilns by 
operating and maintaining a CEMS to measure CO2 emissions 
from all lime kilns according to the Tier 4 Calculation Methodology 
specified in Sec.  98.33(a)(4) and all associated requirements for Tier 
4 in subpart C of this part (General Stationary Fuel Combustion 
Sources).
    (2) Calculate and report process and combustion CO2 
emissions from all lime kilns separately using the procedures specified 
in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (v) of this section.
* * * * *
    (ii) You must calculate a monthly emission factor for each type of 
calcined byproduct or waste sold (including lime kiln dust) using 
Equation S-2 of this section:
* * * * *
EFLKD,i,n = Emission factor for calcined lime byproduct 
or waste type i sold, for month n (metric tons CO2/ton 
lime byproduct).
CaOLKD,i,n = Calcium oxide content for calcined lime 
byproduct or waste type i sold, for month n (metric tons CaO/metric 
ton lime).
MgOLKD,i,n = Magnesium oxide content for calcined lime 
byproduct or waste type i sold, for month n (metric tons MgO/metric 
ton lime).
* * * * *
    (iii) You must calculate the annual CO2 emissions from 
each type of calcined byproduct or waste that is not sold (including 
lime kiln dust and scrubber sludge) using Equation S-3 of this section:
* * * * *
Ewaste,i = Annual CO2 emissions for calcined 
lime byproduct or waste type i that is not sold (metric tons 
CO2).
* * * * *
CaOwaste,i = Calcium oxide content for calcined lime 
byproduct or waste type i that is not sold (metric tons CaO/metric 
ton lime).
MgOwaste,i = Magnesium oxide content for calcined lime 
byproduct or waste type i that is not sold (metric tons MgO/metric 
ton lime).
Mwaste,i = Annual weight or mass of calcined byproducts 
or wastes for lime type i that is not sold (tons).
* * * * *
    (iv) You must calculate annual CO2 process emissions for 
all lime kilns using Equation S-4 of this section:
* * * * *
ECO2 = Annual CO2 process emissions from lime 
production from all lime kilns (metric tons/year).
* * * * *
EFLKD,i,n = Emission factor of calcined byproducts or 
wastes sold for lime type i in calendar month n, (metric tons 
CO2/ton byproduct or waste) from Equation S-2 of this 
section.
MLKD,i,n = Monthly weight or mass of calcined byproducts 
or waste sold (such as lime kiln dust, LKD) for lime type i in 
calendar month n (tons).
Ewaste,i = Annual CO2 emissions for calcined 
lime byproduct or waste type i that is not sold (metric tons 
CO2) from Equation S-3 of this section.
* * * * *
b = Number of calcined byproducts or wastes that are sold.
z = Number of calcined byproducts or wastes that are not sold.
* * * * *

0
41. Section 98.194 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) 
introductory text to read as follows:

Sec.  98.194  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

    (a) You must determine the total quantity of each type of lime 
product that is produced and each calcined byproduct or waste (such as 
lime kiln dust) that is sold. The quantities of each should be directly 
measured monthly

[[Page 71959]]

with the same plant instruments used for accounting purposes, including 
but not limited to, calibrated weigh feeders, rail or truck scales, and 
barge measurements. The direct measurements of each lime product shall 
be reconciled annually with the difference in the beginning of and end 
of year inventories for these products, when measurements represent 
lime sold.
    (b) You must determine the annual quantity of each calcined 
byproduct or waste generated that is not sold by either direct 
measurement using the same instruments identified in paragraph (a) of 
this section or by using a calcined byproduct or waste generation rate.
    (c) You must determine the chemical composition (percent total CaO 
and percent total MgO) of each type of lime product that is produced 
and each type of calcined byproduct or waste sold according to 
paragraph (c)(1) or (2) of this section. You must determine the 
chemical composition of each type of lime product that is produced and 
each type of calcined byproduct or waste sold on a monthly basis. You 
must determine the chemical composition for each type of calcined 
byproduct or waste that is not sold on an annual basis.
* * * * *

0
42. Section 98.195 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.195  Procedures for estimating missing data.

* * * * *
    (a) For each missing value of the quantity of lime produced (by 
lime type), and quantity of calcined byproduct or waste produced and 
sold, the substitute data value shall be the best available estimate 
based on all available process data or data used for accounting 
purposes.
* * * * *

0
43. Section 98.196 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), 
(a)(4), (a)(5), (a)(7), (b)(1) through (6), (b)(9) through (11), and 
(b)(14) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.196  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (1) Method used to determine the quantity of lime that is produced 
and quantity of lime that is sold.
    (2) Method used to determine the quantity of calcined lime 
byproduct or waste sold.
* * * * *
    (4) Beginning and end of year inventories for calcined lime 
byproducts or wastes sold, by type.
    (5) Annual amount of calcined lime byproduct or waste sold, by type 
(tons).
* * * * *
    (7) Annual amount of calcined lime byproduct or waste that is not 
sold, by type (tons).
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) Annual CO2 process emissions from all lime kilns 
combined (metric tons).
    (2) Monthly emission factors (metric ton CO2/ton lime 
product) for each lime product type produced.
    (3) Monthly emission factors for each calcined byproduct or waste 
by lime type that is sold.
    (4) Standard method used (ASTM or NLA testing method) to determine 
chemical compositions of each lime type produced and each calcined lime 
byproduct or waste type.
    (5) Monthly results of chemical composition analysis of each type 
of lime product produced and calcined byproduct or waste sold.
    (6) Annual results of chemical composition analysis of each type of 
lime byproduct or waste that is not sold.
* * * * *
    (9) Method used to determine the quantity of calcined lime 
byproduct or waste sold.
    (10) Monthly amount of calcined lime byproduct or waste sold, by 
type (tons).
    (11) Annual amount of calcined lime byproduct or waste that is not 
sold, by type (tons).
* * * * *
    (14) Beginning and end of year inventories for calcined lime 
byproducts or wastes sold.
* * * * *

Subpart V--[AMENDED]

0
44. Section 98.222 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.222  GHGs to report.

    (a) You must report N2O process emissions from each 
nitric acid train as required by this subpart.
* * * * *
0
45. Section 98.223 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (b) introductory text, (b)(1), (b)(3), (d) 
introductory text, and (e) introductory text.
0
b. Removing the parameter ``Pa,N'' of Equation V-2 in 
paragraph (e) and adding in its place the parameter 
``Pt,N''.
0
c. Revising parameters ``EN2Ot'', ``Pt'', ``DF'', 
and ``AF'' of Equation V-3a in paragraph (g)(1).
0
d. Revising paragraph (g)(2) introductory text.
0
e. Revising parameters ``EN2Ot'', ``EFN2O,t'', 
``Pt'', ``DF1'', ``AF1'', 
``DF2'', ``AF2'', ``DFN'', and 
``AFN'' of Equation V-3b in paragraph (g)(2).
0
f. Revising paragraph (g)(3) introductory text.
0
g. Revising parameters ``EN2Ot'', ``EFN2O,t'', 
``Pt'', ``DFN'', ``AFN'', and 
``FCN'' of Equation V-3c in paragraph (g)(3).
0
h. Revising parameter ``EN2Ot'' of Equation V-3d in 
paragraph (g)(4).
0
i. Revising paragraph (i).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.223  Calculating GHG emissions.

* * * * *
    (b) You must conduct an annual performance test for each nitric 
acid train according to paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this section.
    (1) You must conduct the performance test at the absorber tail gas 
vent, referred to as the test point, for each nitric acid train 
according to Sec.  98.224(b) through (f). If multiple nitric acid 
trains exhaust to a common abatement technology and/or emission point, 
you must sample each process in the ducts before the emissions are 
combined, sample each process when only one process is operating, or 
sample the combined emissions when multiple processes are operating and 
base the site-specific emission factor on the combined production rate 
of the multiple nitric acid trains.
* * * * *
    (3) You must measure the production rate during the performance 
test and calculate the production rate for the test period in tons (100 
percent acid basis) per hour.
* * * * *
    (d) If nitric acid train ``t'' exhausts to any N2O 
abatement technology ``N'', you must determine the destruction 
efficiency for each N2O abatement technology ``N'' according 
to paragraphs (d)(1), (2), or (3) of this section.
* * * * *
    (e) If nitric acid train ``t'' exhausts to any N2O 
abatement technology ``N'', you must determine the annual amount of 
nitric acid produced on nitric acid train ``t'' while N2O 
abatement technology ``N'' is operating according to Sec.  98.224(f). 
Then you must calculate the abatement utilization factor for each 
N2O abatement technology ``N'' for each nitric acid train 
``t'' according to Equation V-2 of this section.
* * * * *

Pt,N = Annual nitric acid production from nitric acid 
train ``t'' during which N2O abatement technology ``N'' 
was operational (ton acid produced, 100 percent acid basis).

* * * * *
    (g) * * *

[[Page 71960]]

    (1) * * *
* * * * *

EN2Ot = Annual N2O mass emissions from nitric 
acid train ``t'' according to this Equation V-3a (metric tons).
* * * * *
Pt = Annual nitric acid production from nitric acid train 
``t'' (ton acid produced, 100 percent acid basis).
DF = Destruction efficiency of N2O abatement technology N 
that is used on nitric acid train ``t'' (decimal fraction of 
N2O removed from vent stream).
AF = Abatement utilization factor of N2O abatement 
technology ``N'' for nitric acid train ``t'' (decimal fraction of 
annual production during which abatement technology is operating).

* * * * *
    (2) If multiple N2O abatement technologies are located 
in series after your test point, you must use the emissions factor 
(determined in Equation V-1 of this section), the destruction 
efficiency (determined in paragraph (d) of this section), the annual 
nitric acid production (determined in paragraph (i) of this section), 
and the abatement utilization factor (determined in paragraph (e) of 
this section), according to Equation V-3b of this section:
* * * * *

EN2Ot = Annual N2O mass emissions from nitric 
acid train ``t'' according to this Equation V-3b (metric tons).
EFN2O,t = N2O emissions factor for nitric acid 
train ``t'' (lb N2O/ton nitric acid produced).
Pt = Annual nitric acid produced from nitric acid train 
``t'' (ton acid produced, 100 percent acid basis).
DF1 = Destruction efficiency of N2O abatement 
technology 1 (decimal fraction of N2O removed from vent 
stream).
AF1 = Abatement utilization factor of N2O 
abatement technology 1 (decimal fraction of time that abatement 
technology 1 is operating).
DF2 = Destruction efficiency of N2O abatement 
technology 2 (decimal fraction of N2O removed from vent 
stream).
AF2 = Abatement utilization factor of N2O 
abatement technology 2 (decimal fraction of time that abatement 
technology 2 is operating).
DFN = Destruction efficiency of N2O abatement 
technology N (decimal fraction of N2O removed from vent 
stream).
AFN = Abatement utilization factor of N2O 
abatement technology N (decimal fraction of time that abatement 
technology N is operating).

* * * * *
    (3) If multiple N2O abatement technologies are located 
in parallel after your test point, you must use the emissions factor 
(determined in Equation V-1 of this section), the destruction 
efficiency (determined in paragraph (d) of this section), the annual 
nitric acid production (determined in paragraph (i) of this section), 
and the abatement utilization factor (determined in paragraph (e) of 
this section), according to Equation V-3c of this section:
* * * * *

EN2Ot = Annual N2O mass emissions from nitric 
acid train ``t'' according to this Equation V-3c (metric tons).
EFN2O,t = N2O emissions factor for nitric acid 
train ``t'' (lb N2O/ton nitric acid produced).
Pt = Annual nitric acid produced from nitric acid train 
``t'' (ton acid produced, 100 percent acid basis).
DFN = Destruction efficiency of N2O abatement 
technology ``N'' (decimal fraction of N2O removed from 
vent stream).
AFN = Abatement utilization factor of N2O 
abatement technology ``N'' (decimal fraction of time that abatement 
technology ``N'' is operating).
FCN = Fraction control factor of N2O abatement 
technology ``N'' (decimal fraction of total emissions from nitric 
acid train ``t'' that are sent to abatement technology ``N'').

* * * * *
    (4) * * *
* * * * *

EN2Ot = Annual N2O mass emissions from nitric 
acid train ``t'' according to this Equation V-3d (metric tons).

* * * * *
    (i) You must determine the total annual amount of nitric acid 
produced on each nitric acid train ``t'' (tons acid produced, 100 
percent acid basis), according to Sec.  98.224(f).

0
46. Section 98.224 is amended by revising paragraphs (c) introductory 
text, (e), and (f) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.224  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

* * * * *
    (c) You must determine the production rate(s) (100 percent acid 
basis) from each nitric acid train during the performance test 
according to paragraphs (c)(1) or (2) of this section.
* * * * *
    (e) You must determine the total monthly amount of nitric acid 
produced. You must also determine the monthly amount of nitric acid 
produced while N2O abatement technology is operating from 
each nitric acid train. These monthly amounts are determined according 
to the methods in paragraphs (c)(1) or (2) of this section.
    (f) You must determine the annual amount of nitric acid produced. 
You must also determine the annual amount of nitric acid produced while 
N2O abatement technology is operating for each nitric acid 
train. These annual amounts are determined by summing the respective 
monthly nitric acid quantities determined in paragraph (e) of this 
section.

0
47. Section 98.226 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a).
0
b. Adding reserved paragraph (o).
0
c. Revising paragraph (p).
    The revisions and addition read as follows:

Sec.  98.226  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (a) Nitric Acid train identification number.
* * * * *
    (p) Fraction control factor for each abatement technology (percent 
of total emissions from the nitric acid train that are sent to the 
abatement technology) if Equation V-3c is used.

Subpart W--[Amended]

0
48. Section 98.233 is amended by:
0
a. Revising parameter ``Convi'' of Equation W-1 in paragraph 
(a).
0
b. Revising parameter ``Convi'' of Equation W-2 in paragraph 
(c).
0
c. Revising parameter ``GWP'' of Equation W-36 in paragraph (v).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.233  Calculating GHG emissions.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *

Convi = Conversion from standard cubic feet to metric 
tons CO2e; 0.000479 for CH4, and 0.00005262 
for CO2.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

Convi = Conversion from standard cubic feet to metric 
tons CO2e; 0.000479 for CH4, and 0.00005262 
for CO2.

* * * * *
    (v) * * *

GWP = Global warming potential, 1 for CO2, 25 for 
CH4, and 298 for N2O.

* * * * *

Subpart X--[AMENDED]

0
49. Section 98.242 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(2) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.242  GHGs to report.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) If you comply with Sec.  98.243(c), report CO2, 
CH4, and N2O combustion emissions under subpart C 
of this part (General Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources) by following 
the requirements of subpart C for all fuels, except

[[Page 71961]]

emissions from burning petrochemical process off-gas in any combustion 
unit, including units that are not part of the petrochemical process 
unit, are not to be reported under subpart C of this part. Determine 
the applicable Tier in subpart C of this part (General Stationary Fuel 
Combustion Sources) based on the maximum rated heat input capacity of 
the stationary combustion source.
* * * * *

0
50. Section 98.243 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (b).
0
b. Revising paragraphs (c)(3) and (4).
0
c. Revising the equation terms ``Cg'', 
``(Fgf)i,n'', and 
``(Pgp)i,n'' of Equation X-1 in paragraph 
(c)(5)(i).
0
d. Removing the equation term ``(MWf)I'' of 
Equation X-1 and adding in its place the parameter 
``(MWf)i,n'' and defining the new parameter in 
the equation terms.
0
e. Removing the equation term ``(MWp)I'' of 
Equation X-1 and adding in its place the parameter 
``(MWp)i,n'' and defining the new parameter in 
the equation terms.
0
f. Revising paragraph (d)(3)(i).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.243  Calculating GHG emissions.

* * * * *
    (b) Continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS). Route all process 
vent emissions and emissions from stationary combustion units that burn 
any amount of process off-gas to one or more stacks and determine GHG 
emissions as specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this 
section.
    (1) Determine CO2 emissions from each stack (except 
flare stacks) according to the Tier 4 Calculation Methodology 
requirements in subpart C of this part.
    (2) For each stack (except flare stacks) that includes emissions 
from combustion of petrochemical process off-gas, calculate 
CH4 and N2O emissions in accordance with subpart 
C of this part (use Equation C-10 and the ``fuel gas'' emission factors 
in Table C-2 of subpart C of this part).
    (3) For each flare, calculate CO2, CH4, and 
N2O emissions using the methodology specified in Sec.  
98.253(b)(1) through (3).
    (c) * * *
    (3) Collect a sample of each feedstock and product at least once 
per month and determine the carbon content of each sample according to 
the procedures of Sec.  98.244(b)(4). If multiple valid 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 carbon content in accordance with paragraphs (c)(4)(i) 
through (iii) of this section.
    (i) Calculate the carbon content assuming 100 percent of that 
feedstock or product is the specific compound.
    (ii) Maintain records of any determination made in accordance with 
this paragraph (c)(4) along with all supporting data, calculations, and 
other information.
    (iii) Reevaluate determinations made under this paragraph (c)(4) 
after any process change that affects the feedstock or product 
composition. Keep records of the process change and the corresponding 
composition determinations. If the feedstock or product composition 
changes so that the average monthly concentration falls below 99.5 
percent, you are no longer permitted to use this alternative method.
    (5) * * *
    (i) * * *
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29NO13.017
    
* * * * *

Cg = Annual net contribution to calculated emissions from 
carbon (C) in gaseous materials, including streams containing 
CO2 recovered for sale or use in another process (kg/yr).
(Fgf)i,n = Volume or mass of gaseous feedstock 
i introduced in month ``n'' (scf or kg). If you measure mass, the 
term (MWf)i,n/MVC is replaced with ``1''.
* * * * *
(MWf)i,n = Molecular weight of gaseous 
feedstock i in month ``n''(kg/kg-mole).

* * * * *

(Pgp)i,n = Volume or mass of gaseous product i 
produced in month ``n'' (scf or kg). If you measure mass, the term 
(MWp)i,n/MVC is replaced with ``1''.
* * * * *
(MWp)i,n = Molecular weight of gaseous product 
i in month ``n'' (kg/kg-mole).

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) For all gaseous fuels that contain ethylene process off-gas, 
use the emission factors for ``Fuel Gas'' in Table C-2 of subpart C of 
this part (General Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources).
* * * * *

0
51. Section 98.244 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (b)(4) introductory text, and paragraphs 
(b)(4)(xiii), (b)(4)(xiv), and (b)(4)(xv)(A).
0
b. Adding paragraph (c).
    The revisions and addition read as follows:

Sec.  98.244  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) Beginning January 1, 2010, use any applicable methods specified 
in paragraphs (b)(4)(i) through (xv) of this section to determine the 
carbon content or composition of feedstocks and products and the 
average molecular weight of gaseous feedstocks and products. Calibrate 
instruments in accordance with paragraphs (b)(4)(i) through (xv) of 
this section, as applicable. For coal used as a feedstock, the samples 
for carbon content determinations shall be taken at a location that is 
representative of the coal feedstock used during the corresponding 
monthly period. For carbon black products, samples shall be taken of 
each grade or type of product produced during the monthly period. 
Samples of coal feedstock or carbon black product for carbon content 
determinations may be either grab samples collected and analyzed 
monthly or a composite of samples collected more frequently and 
analyzed monthly. Analyses conducted in accordance with methods 
specified in paragraphs (b)(4)(i) through (xv) of this

[[Page 71962]]

section may be performed by the owner or operator, by an independent 
laboratory, by the supplier of a feedstock, or by a product customer.
* * * * *
    (xiii) The results of chromatographic analysis of a feedstock or 
product, provided that the chromatograph is operated, maintained, and 
calibrated according to the manufacturer's instructions.
    (xiv) The results of mass spectrometer analysis of a feedstock or 
product, provided that the mass spectrometer is operated, maintained, 
and calibrated according to the manufacturer's instructions.
    (xv) * * *
    (A) An industry standard practice or a method published by a 
consensus-based standards organization if such a method exists for 
carbon black feedstock oils and carbon black products. Consensus-based 
standards organizations include, but are not limited to, the following: 
ASTM International (100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box CB700, West 
Conshohocken, Pennsylvania 19428-B2959, (800) 262-1373, http://www.astm.org), the American National Standards Institute (ANSI, 1819 L 
Street, NW., 6th floor, Washington, DC 20036, (202) 293-8020, http://www.ansi.org), the American Gas Association (AGA, 400 North Capitol 
Street NW., 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20001, (202) 824-7000, http://www.aga.org), the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME, Three 
Park Avenue, New York, NY 10016-5990, (800) 843-2763, http://www.asme.org), the American Petroleum Institute (API, 1220 L Street 
NW., Washington, DC 20005-4070, (202) 682-8000, http://www.api.org), 
and the North American Energy Standards Board (NAESB, 801 Travis 
Street, Suite 1675, Houston, TX 77002, (713) 356-0060, http://www.naesb.org). The method(s) used shall be documented in the 
monitoring plan required under Sec.  98.3(g)(5).
* * * * *
    (c) If you comply with Sec.  98.243(b) or (d), conduct monitoring 
and QA/QC for flares in accordance with Sec.  98.254(b) through (e) for 
each flare gas flow meter, gas composition meter, and/or heating value 
monitor that you use to comply with Sec.  98.253(b)(1) through (b)(3). 
You must implement all applicable QA/QC requirements specified in this 
paragraph (c) beginning no later than January 1, 2015.

0
52. Section 98.245 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  98.245  Procedures for estimating missing data.

    For missing feedstock and product flow rates, use the same 
procedures as for missing fuel usage as specified in Sec.  98.35(b)(2). 
For missing feedstock and product carbon contents and missing molecular 
weights for gaseous feedstocks and products, use the same procedures as 
for missing carbon contents and missing molecular weights for fuels as 
specified in Sec.  98.35(b)(1).
    For missing flare data, follow the procedures in Sec.  98.255(b) 
and (c).

0
53. Section 98.246 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a)(6), (a)(8), (a)(9), (a)(11) introductory 
text, (a)(11)(iii), and (b)(2) through (5).
0
b. Removing and reserving paragraph (b)(6).
0
c. Revising paragraph (c)(4).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.246  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (6) For each feedstock and product, provide the information 
specified in paragraphs (a)(6)(i) through (a)(6)(iii) of this section.
    (i) Name of each method used to determine carbon content or 
molecular weight in accordance with Sec.  98.244(b)(4);
    (ii) Description of each type of device (e.g., flow meter, weighing 
device) used to determine flow 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 flow or mass in accordance with 
Sec.  98.244(b)(1) through (3).
* * * * *
    (8) Identification of each combustion unit that burned both process 
off-gas and supplemental fuel, including combustion units that are not 
part of the petrochemical process unit.
    (9) The number of days during which off-specification product was 
produced if the alternative to sampling and analysis specified in Sec.  
98.243(c)(4) is used for a product, and, if applicable, the date of any 
process change that reduced the monthly average composition to less 
than 99.5 percent for each product or feedstock for which you comply 
with the alternative to sampling and analysis specified in Sec.  
98.243(c)(4).
* * * * *
    (11) If you determine carbon content or composition of a feedstock 
or product using a method under Sec.  98.244(b)(4)(xv)(B), report the 
information listed in paragraphs (a)(11)(i) through (a)(11)(iii) of 
this section. Include the information in paragraph (a)(11)(i) of this 
section in each annual report. Include the information in paragraphs 
(a)(11)(ii) and (a)(11)(iii) of this section only in the first 
applicable annual report, and provide any changes to this information 
in subsequent annual reports.
* * * * *
    (iii) An explanation of why an alternative to the methods listed in 
Sec. Sec.  98.244(b)(4)(i) through (xiv) is needed.
    (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. 
Sections 98.36(c)(2)(ii) and (c)(2)(ix) 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), (b)(7), and (e)(2)(vi).
    (4) For each CEMS monitoring location that meets the conditions in 
paragraph (b)(2) or (3) of this section, provide an estimate based on 
engineering judgment of the fraction of the total CO2 
emissions that results from CO2 directly emitted by the 
petrochemical process unit plus CO2 generated by the 
combustion of off-gas from the petrochemical process unit.
    (5) For each CEMS monitoring location that meets the conditions in 
paragraph (b)(2) of this section, report the CH4 and 
N2O emissions expressed in metric tons of each gas. For each 
CEMS monitoring location, provide an estimate based on engineering 
judgment of the fraction of the total CH4 and N2O 
emissions that is attributable to combustion of off-gas from the 
petrochemical process unit.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (4) Name and annual quantity of each feedstock (metric tons).
* * * * *

0
54. Section 98.247 is amended by revising paragraphs (b) introductory 
text, (b)(2), and (b)(3) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.247  Records that must be retained.

* * * * *
    (b) If you comply with the mass balance methodology in Sec.  
98.243(c), then you must retain records of the information listed in 
paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this section.
* * * * *

[[Page 71963]]

    (2) Start and end times for time periods when off-specification 
product is produced, if you comply with the alternative methodology in 
Sec.  98.243(c)(4) for determining carbon content of product.
    (3) As part of the monitoring plan required under Sec.  98.3(g)(5), 
record the estimated accuracy of measurement devices and the technical 
basis for these estimates.
* * * * *

0
55. Section 98.248 is amended by revising the definition of ``Product'' 
to read as follows:

Sec.  98.248  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Product, as used in Sec.  98.243, 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--[AMENDED]

0
56. Section 98.252 is amended by revising the parenthetical phrase 
preceding the last two sentences in paragraph (a) introductory text and 
revising paragraph (i) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.252  GHGs to report.

* * * * *
    (a) * * * (Use the default CH4 and N2O 
emission factors for ``Fuel Gas'' in Table C-2 of this part. For Tier 
3, use either the default high heat value for fuel gas in Table C-1 of 
subpart C of this part or a calculated HHV, as allowed in Equation C-8 
of subpart C of this part.) * * *
* * * * *
    (i) CO2 emissions from non-merchant hydrogen production 
process units (not including hydrogen produced from catalytic reforming 
units) following the calculation methodologies, monitoring and QA/QC 
methods, missing data procedures, reporting requirements, and 
recordkeeping requirements of subpart P of this part.

0
57. Section 98.253 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the parameter ``EmFCH4'' to Equation Y-4 in 
paragraph (b)(2) and ``EmFN2O'' to Equation Y-5 in paragraph 
(b)(3).
0
b. Revising paragraphs (f)(2) and (3).
0
c. Revising paragraph (f)(4) introductory text and the parameters 
``FSG'' and ``MFc'' to Equation Y-12.
0
d. Revising paragraphs (j) introductory text, (k) introductory text, 
and (m) introductory text.
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.253  Calculating GHG emissions.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) * * *
* * * * *

EmFCH4 = Default CH4 emission factor for 
``Fuel Gas'' from Table C-2 of subpart C of this part (General 
Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources) (kg CH4/MMBtu).

* * * * *
    (3) * * *
* * * * *

EmFN2O = Default N2O emission factor for 
``Fuel Gas'' from Table C-2 of subpart C of this part (General 
Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources) (kg N2O/MMBtu).

* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (2) Flow measurement. If you have a continuous flow monitor on the 
sour gas feed to the sulfur recovery plant or the sour gas feed sent 
for off-site sulfur recovery, you must use the measured flow rates when 
the monitor is operational to calculate the sour gas flow rate. If you 
do not have a continuous flow monitor on the sour gas feed to the 
sulfur recovery plant or the sour gas feed sent for off-site sulfur 
recovery, you must use engineering calculations, company records, or 
similar estimates of volumetric sour gas flow.
    (3) Carbon content. If you have a continuous gas composition 
monitor capable of measuring carbon content on the sour gas feed to the 
sulfur recovery plant or the sour gas feed sent for off-site for sulfur 
recovery, or if you monitor gas composition for carbon content on a 
routine basis, you must use the measured carbon content value. 
Alternatively, you may develop a site-specific carbon content factor 
using limited measurement data or engineering estimates or use the 
default factor of 0.20.
    (4) Calculate the CO2 emissions from each on-site sulfur 
recovery plant and for sour gas sent off-site for sulfur recovery using 
Equation Y-12 of this section.
* * * * *

FSG = Volumetric flow rate of sour gas (including sour 
water stripper gas) fed to the sulfur recovery plant or the sour gas 
feed sent off-site for sulfur recovery (scf/year).

* * * * *

MFC = Mole fraction of carbon in the sour gas fed to the 
sulfur recovery plant or the sour gas feed sent off-site for sulfur 
recovery (kg-mole C/kg-mole gas); default = 0.20.

* * * * *
    (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, CH4 emissions if you elected to use the method in 
paragraph (i)(1) of this section, and CO2 and/or 
CH4 emissions, as applicable, if you elected this method as 
an alternative to the methods in paragraphs (f), (h), or (k) of this 
section.
* * * * *
    (k) For uncontrolled blowdown systems, you must calculate 
CH4 emissions either using the methods for process vents in 
paragraph (j) of this section regardless of the CH4 
concentration or using Equation Y-20 of this section. Blowdown systems 
where the uncondensed gas stream is routed to a flare or similar 
control device are considered to be controlled and are not required to 
estimate emissions under this paragraph (k).
* * * * *
    (m) For storage tanks, except as provided in paragraph (m)(3) of 
this section, calculate CH4 emissions using the applicable 
methods in paragraphs (m)(1) and (2) of this section.
* * * * *
0
58. Section 98.256 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (f)(6), (h) introductory text, and (h)(2) 
through (6).
0
b. Adding paragraph (j)(10).
0
c. Revising paragraph (k)(4).
0
d. Adding paragraph (k)(6).
0
e. Revising paragraph (o)(4)(vi).
0
f. Removing and reserving paragraphs (o)(5) through (7).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  98.256  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (6) If you use a CEMS, the relevant information required under 
Sec.  98.36 for the Tier 4 Calculation Methodology, the CO2 
annual emissions as measured by the CEMS (unadjusted to remove 
CO2 combustion emissions associated with additional units, 
if present) and the process CO2 emissions as calculated 
according to Sec.  98.253(c)(1)(ii). Report the CO2 annual 
emissions associated with sources other than those from the coke burn-
off in accordance with the

[[Page 71964]]

applicable subpart (e.g., subpart C of this part in the case of a CO 
boiler).
* * * * *
    (h) For on-site sulfur recovery plants and for emissions from sour 
gas sent off-site for sulfur recovery, the owner and operator shall 
report:
* * * * *
    (2) For each on-site sulfur recovery plant, the maximum rated 
throughput (metric tons sulfur produced/stream day), a description of 
the type of sulfur recovery plant, and an indication of the method used 
to calculate CO2 annual emissions for the sulfur recovery 
plant (e.g., CO2 CEMS, Equation Y-12, or process vent method 
in Sec.  98.253(j)).
    (3) The calculated CO2 annual emissions for each on-site 
sulfur recovery plant, expressed in metric tons. The calculated annual 
CO2 emissions from sour gas sent off-site for sulfur 
recovery, expressed in metric tons.
    (4) If you use Equation Y-12 of this subpart, the annual volumetric 
flow to the on-site and off-site sulfur recovery plant (in scf/year), 
the molar volume conversion factor (in scf/kg-mole), and the annual 
average mole fraction of carbon in the sour gas (in kg-mole C/kg-mole 
gas).
    (5) If you recycle tail gas to the front of an on-site sulfur 
recovery plant, indicate whether the recycled flow rate and carbon 
content are included in the measured data under Sec.  98.253(f)(2) and 
(3). Indicate whether a correction for CO2 emissions in the 
tail gas was used in Equation Y-12. If so, then report the value of the 
correction, the annual volume of recycled tail gas (in scf/year) and 
the annual average mole fraction of carbon in the tail gas (in kg-mole 
C/kg-mole gas). Indicate whether you used the default (95%) or a unit 
specific correction, and if a unit specific correction is used, report 
the approach used.
    (6) If you use a CEMS, the relevant information required under 
Sec.  98.36 for the Tier 4 Calculation Methodology, the CO2 
annual emissions as measured by the CEMS and the annual process 
CO2 emissions calculated according to Sec.  98.253(f)(1). 
Report the CO2 annual emissions associated with fuel 
combustion in accordance with subpart C of this part (General 
Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources).
* * * * *
    (j) * * *
    (10) If you use Equation Y-19 of this subpart, the relevant 
information required under paragraph (l)(5) of this section.
    (k) * * *
    (4) For each set of coking drums that are the same dimensions: The 
number of coking drums in the set, the height and diameter of the coke 
drums (in feet), the cumulative number of vessel openings for all 
delayed coking drums in the set, the typical venting pressure (in 
psig), void fraction (in cf gas/cf of vessel), and the mole fraction of 
methane in coking gas (in kg-mole CH4/kg-mole gas, wet 
basis).
* * * * *
    (6) If you use Equation Y-19 of this subpart, the relevant 
information required under paragraph (l)(5) of this section for each 
set of coke drums or vessels of the same size.
* * * * *
    (o) * * *
    (4) * * *
    (vi) If you did not use Equation Y-23, the tank-specific methane 
composition data and the annual gas generation volume (scf/yr) used to 
estimate the cumulative CH4 emissions for storage tanks used 
to process unstabilized crude oil.
* * * * *

Subpart Z--[AMENDED]

0
59. Section 98.263 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(1)(ii) 
introductory text and the parameter ``CO2n,i'' of Equation 
Z-1b to read as follows:

Sec.  98.263  Calculating GHG emissions.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (ii) If your process measurement provides the CO2 
content directly as an output, calculate and report the process 
CO2 emissions from each wet-process phosphoric acid process 
line using Equation Z-1b of this section:
* * * * *

CO2n,i = Carbon dioxide content of a grab sample batch of 
phosphate rock by origin i obtained during month n (percent by 
weight, expressed as a decimal fraction).

* * * * *

0
60. Section 98.264 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to 
read as follows:

Sec.  98.264  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

    (a) You must obtain a monthly grab sample of phosphate rock 
directly from the rock being fed to the process line before it enters 
the mill using one of the following methods. You may conduct the 
representative bulk sampling using a method published by a consensus 
standards organization, or you may use industry consensus standard 
practice methods, including but not limited to the Phosphate Mining 
States Methods Used and Adopted by the Association of Fertilizer and 
Phosphate Chemists (AFPC). If phosphate rock is obtained from more than 
one origin in a month, you must obtain a sample from each origin of 
rock or obtain a composite representative sample.
    (b) You must determine the carbon dioxide or inorganic carbon 
content of each monthly grab sample of phosphate rock (consumed in the 
production of phosphoric acid). You may use a method published by a 
consensus standards organization, or you may use industry consensus 
standard practice methods, including but not limited to the Phosphate 
Mining States Methods Used and Adopted by AFPC.
* * * * *

0
61. Section 98.265 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  98.265  Procedures for estimating missing data.

    A complete record of all measured parameters used in the GHG 
emissions calculations is required. Therefore, whenever a quality-
assured value of a required parameter is unavailable, a substitute data 
value for the missing parameter must be used in the calculations as 
specified in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section.
    (a) For each missing value of the inorganic carbon content or 
CO2 content of phosphate rock (by origin), you must use the 
appropriate default factor provided in Table Z-1 of this subpart. 
Alternatively, you must determine a substitute data value by 
calculating the arithmetic average of the quality-assured values of 
inorganic carbon contents or CO2 contents of phosphate rock 
of origin i (see Equation Z-1a or Z-1b of this subpart) from samples 
immediately preceding and immediately following the missing data 
incident. If no quality-assured data on inorganic carbon contents or 
CO2 contents of phosphate rock of origin i are available 
prior to the missing data incident, the substitute data value shall be 
the first quality-assured value for inorganic carbon contents or 
CO2 contents for phosphate rock of origin i obtained after 
the missing data period.
    (b) For each missing value of monthly mass consumption of phosphate 
rock (by origin), you must use the best available estimate based on all 
available process data or data used for accounting purposes.

0
62. Section 98.266 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (b), (d), and 
(f)(5), (6), and (8) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.266  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *

[[Page 71965]]

    (a) Annual phosphoric acid production, by origin of the phosphate 
rock (tons).
    (b) Annual phosphoric acid production capacity (tons).
* * * * *
    (d) Annual phosphate rock consumption from monthly measurement 
records by origin (tons).
* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (5) Monthly inorganic carbon content of phosphate rock for each 
wet-process phosphoric acid process line for which Equation Z-1a is 
used (percent by weight, expressed as a decimal fraction), or 
CO2 content (percent by weight, expressed as a decimal 
fraction) for which Equation Z-1b is used.
    (6) Monthly mass of phosphate rock consumed, by origin, in 
production for each wet-process phosphoric acid process line (tons).
* * * * *
    (8) Number of times missing data procedures were used to estimate 
phosphate rock consumption (months), inorganic carbon contents of the 
phosphate rock (months), and CO2 contents of the phosphate 
rock (months).
* * * * *

0
63. Section 98.267 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (c) to 
read as follows:

Sec.  98.267  Records that must be retained.

* * * * *
    (a) Monthly mass of phosphate rock consumed by origin (tons).
* * * * *
    (c) Documentation of the procedures used to ensure the accuracy of 
monthly phosphate rock consumption by origin.

Subpart AA--[AMENDED]

0
64. Section 98.273 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(3) introductory 
text and the parameter ``(EF)'' of Equation AA-1 to read as follows:

Sec.  98.273  Calculating GHG emissions.

    (a) * * *
    (3) Calculate biogenic CO2 emissions and emissions of 
CH4 and N2O from biomass using measured 
quantities of spent liquor solids fired, site-specific HHV, and default 
emissions factors, according to Equation AA-1 of this section:
* * * * *

(EF) = Default emission factor for CO2, CH4, 
or N2O, from Table AA-1 of this subpart (kg 
CO2, CH4, or N2O per mmBtu).

* * * * *

0
65. Section 98.276 is amended by revising paragraphs (e) and (k) to 
read as follows:

Sec.  98.276  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (e) The default emission factor for CO2, CH4, 
or N2O, used in Equation AA-1 of this subpart (kg 
CO2, CH4, or N2O per mmBtu).
* * * * *
    (k) Total annual production of unbleached virgin chemical pulp 
produced onsite during the reporting year in air-dried metric tons per 
year. This total annual production value is the sum of all kraft, 
semichemical, soda, and sulfite pulp produced onsite, prior to 
bleaching, through all virgin pulping lines. Do not include mechanical 
pulp or secondary fiber repulped for paper production in the virgin 
pulp production total.

0
66. Table AA-1 is revised to read as follows:

 Table AA-1 to Subpart AA of Part 98--Kraft Pulping Liquor Emissions Factors for Biomass-Based CO2, CH4, and N2O
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Biomass-based emissions factors (kg/mmBtu
                                                                                        HHV)
                           Wood furnish                            ---------------------------------------------
                                                                      \a\ CO2        CH4              N2O
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
North American Softwood...........................................         94.4       0.0019             0.00042
North American Hardwood...........................................         93.7       0.0019             0.00042
Bagasse...........................................................         95.5       0.0019             0.00042
Bamboo............................................................         93.7       0.0019             0.00042
Straw.............................................................         95.1       0.0019             0.00042
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes emissions from both the recovery furnace and pulp mill lime kiln.

0
67. Table AA-2 is revised to 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 lime kilns                        Kraft calciners
                                  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            CH4              N2O               CH4                   N2O
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Residual Oil (any type)..........  0.0027..............            0  0.0027..............  0.0003
Distillate Oil (any type)........  0.0027..............            0  0.0027..............  0.0004
Natural Gas......................  0.0027..............            0  0.0027..............  0.0001
Biogas...........................  0.0027..............            0  0.0027..............  0.0001
Petroleum coke...................  0.0027..............            0  \a\NA...............  \a\NA
Other Fuels......................  See Table C-2.......            0  See Table C-2.......  See Table C-2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Emission factors for kraft calciners are not available.

[[Page 71966]]

Subpart BB--[AMENDED]

0
68. Section 98.282 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.282  GHGs to report.

* * * * *
    (a) CO2 process emissions from all silicon carbide 
process units or furnaces combined.
* * * * *

0
69. Section 98.283 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the introductory text.
0
b. Revising paragraphs (a), (b) introductory text, and (b)(2) 
introductory text.
0
c. Revising the parameter ``Tn'' in Equation BB-2 in 
paragraph (b)(2).
0
d. Removing paragraph (d).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.283  Calculating GHG emissions.

    You must calculate and report the combined annual process 
CO2 emissions from all silicon carbide process units and 
production furnaces using the procedures in either paragraph (a) or (b) 
of this section.
    (a) Calculate and report under this subpart the combined annual 
process CO2 emissions by operating and maintaining CEMS 
according to the Tier 4 Calculation Methodology specified in Sec.  
98.33(a)(4) and all associated requirements for Tier 4 in subpart C of 
this part (General Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources).
    (b) Calculate and report under this subpart the combined annual 
process CO2 emissions using the procedures in paragraphs 
(b)(1) and (b)(2) of this section.
* * * * *
    (2) Calculate annual CO2 process emissions from the 
silicon carbide production facility according to Equation BB-2 of this 
section:
* * * * *

Tn = Petroleum coke consumption in calendar month n 
(tons).

* * * * *

0
70. Section 98.286 is amended by revising paragraph (b) introductory 
text to read as follows:

Sec.  98.286  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) If a CEMS is not used to measure process CO2 
emissions, you must report the information in paragraph (b)(1) through 
(8) of this section for all silicon carbide process units or production 
furnaces combined:
* * * * *

Subpart DD--[AMENDED]

0
71. Section 98.304 is amended by revising paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) to 
read as follows:

Sec.  98.304  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) Ensure that cylinders returned to the gas supplier are 
consistently weighed on a scale that is certified to be accurate and 
precise to within 2 pounds of true weight and is periodically 
recalibrated per the manufacturer's specifications. Either measure 
residual gas (the amount of gas remaining in returned cylinders) or 
have the gas supplier measure it. If the gas supplier weighs the 
residual gas, obtain from the gas supplier a detailed monthly 
accounting, within  2 pounds, of residual gas amounts in 
the cylinders returned to the gas supplier.
    (2) Ensure that cylinders weighed for the beginning and end of year 
inventory measurements are weighed on a scale that is certified to be 
accurate and precise to within 2 pounds of true weight and is 
periodically recalibrated per the manufacturer's specifications. All 
scales used to measure quantities that are to be reported under Sec.  
98.306 must be calibrated using calibration procedures specified by the 
scale manufacturer. Calibration must be performed prior to the first 
reporting year. After the initial calibration, recalibration must be 
performed at the minimum frequency specified by the manufacturer.
* * * * *

Subpart FF--[AMENDED]

0
72. Section 98.320 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) to 
read as follows:

Sec.  98.320  Definition of the source category.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) Each ventilation system shaft or vent hole, including both 
those points where mine ventilation air is emitted and those where it 
is sold, used onsite, or otherwise destroyed (including by ventilation 
air methane (VAM) oxidizers).
    (2) Each degasification system well or gob gas vent hole, including 
degasification systems deployed before, during, or after mining 
operations are conducted in a mine area. This includes both those wells 
and vent holes where coal bed gas is emitted, and those where the gas 
is sold, used onsite, or otherwise destroyed (including by flaring).
* * * * *

0
73. Section 98.322 is amended by revising paragraphs (b) and (d) to 
read as follows:

Sec.  98.322  GHGs to report.

* * * * *
    (b) You must report CH4 destruction from systems where 
gas is sold, used onsite, or otherwise destroyed (including by VAM 
oxidation and by flaring).
* * * * *
    (d) You must report under this subpart the CO2 emissions 
from coal mine gas CH4 destruction occurring at the 
facility, where the gas is not a fuel input for energy generation or 
use (e.g., flaring and VAM oxidation).
* * * * *

0
74. Section 98.323 is amended by:
0
a. Revising parameters ``V'', ``MCF'', ``(fH2O)'' and ``P'' 
of Equation FF-1 in paragraph (a).
0
b. Revising paragraph (a)(2).
0
c. Revising Equation FF-3 and revising parameters ``Vi'', 
``MCFi'', ``(fH2O)'', and ``Pi'' of 
Equation FF-3 in paragraph (b).
0
d. Revising paragraph (b)(1).
0
e. Removing parameter ``CH4D'' of Equation FF-4 of paragraph 
(b)(2) and adding parameter ``(CH4D)i,j'' in its 
place.
0
f. Revising paragraph (c) introductory text and Equation FF-6 in 
paragraph (c)(1).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.323  Calculating GHG emissions.

    (a) * * *

V = Volumetric flow rate for the quarter (acfm) based on sampling or 
a flow rate meter. If a flow rate meter is used and the meter 
automatically corrects to standard temperature and pressure, then 
use scfm and replace ``520[deg]R/T x P/1 atm'' with ``1''.
MCF = Moisture correction factor for the measurement period, 
volumetric basis.
= 1 when V and C are measured on a dry basis or if both are measured 
on a wet basis.
= 1-(fH2O) when V is measured on a wet basis and C is 
measured on a dry basis.
= 1/[1-(fH2O)] when V is measured on a dry basis and C is 
measured on a wet basis.
(fH2O) = Moisture content of the CH4 emitted 
during the measurement period, volumetric basis (cubic feet water 
per cubic feet emitted gas).
* * * * *
P = Absolute pressure at which flow is measured (atm) for the 
quarter. The annual average barometric pressure from the nearest 
NOAA weather service station may be used as a default.

* * * * *
    (2) Values of V, C, T, P, and (fH2O), if applicable, 
must be based on measurements taken at least once each

[[Page 71967]]

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) * * *
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29NO13.018
    
* * * * *

Vi = Measured volumetric flow rate for the days in the 
week when the degasification system is in operation at that 
monitoring point, based on sampling or a flow rate meter (acfm). If 
a flow rate meter is used and the meter automatically corrects to 
standard temperature and pressure, then use scfm and replace 
``520[deg]R/Tix Pi/1 atm'' with ``1''.
MCFi = Moisture correction factor for the measurement 
period, volumetric basis.
     = 1 when Vi and Ci are measured on a dry 
basis or if both are measured on a wet basis.
     = 1-(fH2O)I when Vi is 
measured on a wet basis and Ci is measured on a dry 
basis.
     = 1/[1-(fH2O)i] when Vi is 
measured on a dry basis and Ci is measured on a wet 
basis.
(fH2O) = Moisture content of the CH4 emitted 
during the measurement period, volumetric basis (cubic feet water 
per cubic feet emitted gas).
* * * * *
Pi = Absolute pressure at which flow is measured (atm).

* * * * *
    (1) Values for V, C, T, P, and (fH2O), if applicable, 
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) * * *
* * * * *

(CH4D)i,j = Weekly CH4 liberated 
from a degasification monitoring point (metric tons CH4).

* * * * *
    (c) If gas from a degasification system or ventilation system is 
sold, used onsite, or otherwise destroyed (including by flaring or VAM 
oxidation), you must calculate the quarterly CH4 destroyed 
for each destruction device and each point of offsite transport to a 
destruction device, using Equation FF-5 of this section. You must 
measure CH4 content and flow rate according to the 
provisions in Sec.  98.324, and calculate the methane routed to the 
destruction device (CH4) using either Equation FF-1 or 
Equation FF-4 of this section, as applicable.
* * * * *
    (1) * * *
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29NO13.019
    
* * * * *

0
75. Section 98.324 is amended by revising paragraphs (b) introductory 
text and (c)(2) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.324  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) For CH4 liberated from ventilation systems, 
determine whether CH4 will be monitored from each 
ventilation shaft and vent hole, from a centralized monitoring point, 
or from a combination of the two options. Operators are allowed 
flexibility for aggregating emissions from more than one ventilation 
point, as long as emissions from all are addressed, and the methodology 
for calculating total emissions documented. Monitor by one of the 
following options:
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) Collect weekly (once each calendar week, with at least three 
days between measurements) or more frequent samples, for all 
degasification wells and gob gas vent holes. Determine weekly or more 
frequent flow rates, methane concentration, temperature, and pressure 
from these degasification wells and gob gas vent holes. Methane 
composition should be determined either by submitting samples to a lab 
for analysis, or from the use of methanometers at the degasification 
monitoring site. Follow the sampling protocols for sampling of methane 
emissions from ventilation shafts, as described in Sec.  98.324(b)(1). 
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
76. Section 98.326 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (f), (h), 
(i), (j), (o), and (r), and adding paragraph (t) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.326  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (a) Quarterly CH4 liberated from each ventilation 
monitoring point, (metric tons CH4).
* * * * *
    (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.
* * * * *
    (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.
    (i) Quarterly CH4 concentration (%) used to calculate 
CH4 liberated from degasification systems and if the data is 
based on CEMS or weekly sampling.
    (j) Weekly volumetric flow rate used to calculate CH4 
destruction for each destruction device and each point of

[[Page 71968]]

offsite transport, and units of measure (acfm or scfm).
* * * * *
    (o) Temperatures ([deg]R), pressure (atm), moisture content, and 
the moisture correction factor (if applicable) used in Equation FF-1 
and FF-3 of this subpart; and the gaseous organic concentration 
correction factor, if Equation FF-9 was required.
* * * * *
    (r) Identification information and description for each well, 
shaft, and vent hole, including paragraphs (r)(1) through (r)(3) of 
this section:
    (1) Indication of whether the well, shaft, or vent hole is 
monitored individually, or as part of a centralized monitoring point. 
Note which method (sampling or continuous monitoring) was used.
    (2) Start date and close date of each well, shaft, and vent hole.
    (3) Number of days the well, shaft, or vent hole was in operation 
during the reporting year.
* * * * *
    (t) Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) identification for 
this coal mine.

Subpart HH--[AMENDED]

0
77. Section 98.340 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.340  Definition of the source category.

    (a) This source category applies to municipal solid waste (MSW) 
landfills that accepted waste on or after January 1, 1980, unless all 
three of the following conditions apply.
    (1) The MSW landfill did not receive waste on or after January 1, 
2013.
    (2) The MSW landfill had CH4 generation as determined 
using Equation HH-5 and, if applicable, Equation HH-7 of this subpart 
of less than 1,190 metric tons of CH4 in the 2013 reporting 
year.
    (3) The owner or operator of the MSW landfill was not required to 
submit an annual report under any requirement of this part in any 
reporting year prior to 2013.
* * * * *

0
78. Section 98.343 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the parameters ``DOC'' and ``F'' of Equation HH-1 in 
paragraph (a)(1).
0
b. Revising Equation HH-4 and the parameters ``N'' and ``0.0423'' of 
Equation HH-4 in paragraph (b)(1).
0
c. Revising paragraphs (b)(2)(i), (b)(2)(ii), (b)(2)(iii)(A), and 
(b)(2)(iii)(B).
0
d. Revising parameter ``OX'' of Equation HH-5 in paragraph (c)(1).
0
e. Revising paragraphs (c)(3)(i) and (ii).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.343  Calculating GHG emissions.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
* * * * *

DOC = Degradable organic carbon from Table HH-1 of this subpart 
[fraction (metric tons C/metric ton waste)].
* * * * *
F = Fraction by volume of CH4 in landfill gas from 
measurement data for the current reporting year, if available 
(fraction, dry basis, corrected to 0% oxygen); otherwise, use the 
default of 0.5.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29NO13.020
    
* * * * *

N = Total number of measurement periods in a year. Use daily 
averaging periods for a continuous monitoring system and N = 365 (or 
N = 366 for leap years). For monthly sampling, as provided in 
paragraph (b)(2) of this section, use N=12.
* * * * *
0.0423 = Density of CH4 lb/cf at 520[deg]R or 60 degrees 
Fahrenheit and 1 atm.

* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) Continuously monitor gas flow rate and determine the cumulative 
volume of landfill gas each month and the cumulative volume of landfill 
gas each year that is collected and routed to a destruction device 
(before any treatment equipment). Under this option, the gas flow meter 
is not required to automatically correct for temperature, pressure, or, 
if necessary, moisture content. If the gas flow meter is not equipped 
with automatic correction for temperature, pressure, or, if necessary, 
moisture content, you must determine these parameters as specified in 
paragraph (b)(2)(iii) of this section.
    (ii) Determine the CH4 concentration in the landfill gas 
that is collected and routed to a destruction device (before any 
treatment equipment) in a location near or representative of the 
location of the gas flow meter at least once each calendar month; if 
only one measurement is made each calendar month, there must be at 
least fourteen days between measurements.
    (iii) * * *
    (A) Determine the temperature and pressure in the landfill gas that 
is collected and routed to a destruction device (before any treatment 
equipment) in a location near or representative of the location of the 
gas flow meter at least once each calendar month; if only one 
measurement is made each calendar month, there must be at least 
fourteen days between measurements.
    (B) If the CH4 concentration is determined on a dry 
basis and flow is determined on a wet basis or CH4 
concentration is determined on a wet basis and flow is determined on a 
dry basis, and the flow meter does not automatically correct for 
moisture content, determine the moisture content in the landfill gas 
that is collected and routed to a destruction device (before any 
treatment equipment) in a location near or representative of the 
location of the gas flow meter at least once each calendar month; if 
only one measurement is made each calendar month, there must be at 
least fourteen days between measurements.
    (c) * * *
    (1) * * *
* * * * *

OX = Oxidation fraction. Use the appropriate oxidation fraction 
default value from Table HH-4 of this subpart.

* * * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) Calculate CH4 emissions from the modeled 
CH4 generation and measured CH4 recovery using 
Equation HH-6 of this section.

[[Page 71969]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29NO13.021

Where:

Emissions = Methane emissions from the landfill in the reporting 
year (metric tons CH4).
GCH4 = Modeled methane generation rate in reporting year 
from Equation HH-1 of this section or the quantity of recovered 
CH4 from Equation HH-4 of this section, whichever is 
greater (metric tons CH4).
N = Number of landfill gas measurement locations (associated with a 
destruction device or gas sent off-site). If a single monitoring 
location is used to monitor volumetric flow and CH4 
concentration of the recovered gas sent to one or multiple 
destruction devices, then N=1.
Rn = Quantity of recovered CH4 from Equation 
HH-4 of this section for the nth measurement location 
(metric tons).
OX = Oxidation fraction. Use the appropriate oxidation fraction 
default value from Table HH-4 of this subpart.
DEn = Destruction efficiency (lesser of manufacturer's 
specified destruction efficiency and 0.99) for the nth 
measurement location. If the gas is transported off-site for 
destruction, use DE = 1. If the volumetric flow and CH4 
concentration of the recovered gas is measured at a single location 
providing landfill gas to multiple destruction devices (including 
some gas destroyed on-site and some gas sent off-site for 
destruction), calculate DEn as the arithmetic average of 
the DE values determined for each destruction device associated with 
that measurement location.
fDest,n = Fraction of hours the destruction device 
associated with the nth measurement location was 
operating during active gas flow calculated as the annual operating 
hours for the destruction device divided by the annual hours flow 
was sent to the destruction device as measured at the nth 
measurement location. If the gas is transported off-site for 
destruction, use fDest,n= 1. If the volumetric flow and 
CH4 concentration of the recovered gas is measured at a 
single location providing landfill gas to multiple destruction 
devices (including some gas destroyed on-site and some gas sent off-
site for destruction), calculate fDest,n as the 
arithmetic average of the fDest values determined for 
each destruction device associated with that measurement location.

    (ii) Calculate CH4 generation and CH4 
emissions using measured CH4 recovery and estimated gas 
collection efficiency and Equations HH-7 and HH-8 of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29NO13.022

Where:

MG = Methane generation, adjusted for oxidation, from the landfill 
in the reporting year (metric tons CH4).
Emissions = Methane emissions from the landfill in the reporting 
year (metric tons CH4).
N = Number of landfill gas measurement locations (associated with a 
destruction device or gas sent off-site). If a single monitoring 
location is used to monitor volumetric flow and CH4 
concentration of the recovered gas sent to one or multiple 
destruction devices, then N=1.
Rn = Quantity of recovered CH4 from Equation 
HH-4 of this section for the nth measurement location 
(metric tons CH4).
CE = Collection efficiency estimated at landfill, taking into 
account system coverage, operation, and cover system materials from 
Table HH-3 of this subpart. If area by soil cover type information 
is not available, use default value of 0.75 (CE4 in table HH-3 of 
this subpart) for all areas under active influence of the collection 
system.
fRec,n = Fraction of hours the recovery system associated 
with the nth measurement location was operating (annual 
operating hours/8760 hours per year or annual operating hours/8784 
hours per year for a leap year).
OX = Oxidation fraction. Use appropriate oxidation fraction default 
value from Table HH-4 of this subpart.
DEn = Destruction efficiency, (lesser of manufacturer's 
specified destruction efficiency and 0.99) for the nth 
measurement location. If the gas is transported off-site for 
destruction, use DE = 1. If the volumetric flow and CH4 
concentration of the recovered gas is measured at a single location 
providing landfill gas to multiple destruction devices (including 
some gas destroyed on-site and some gas sent off-site for 
destruction), calculate DEn as the arithmetic average of 
the DE values determined for each destruction device associated with 
that measurement location.
fDest,n = Fraction of hours the destruction device 
associated with the nth measurement location was 
operating during active gas flow calculated as the annual operating 
hours for the destruction device divided by the annual hours flow 
was sent to the destruction device as measured at the nth 
measurement location. If the gas is transported off-site for 
destruction, use fDest,n= 1. If the volumetric flow and 
CH4 concentration of the recovered gas is measured at a 
single location providing landfill gas to multiple destruction 
devices (including some gas destroyed on-site and some gas sent off-
site for destruction), calculate fDest,n as the 
arithmetic average of the fDest values determined for 
each destruction device associated with that measurement location.

0
79. Section 98.344 is amended by revising paragraph (e) and adding 
paragraph (f) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.344  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

* * * * *
    (e) For landfills electing to measure the fraction by volume of 
CH4 in landfill gas (F), follow the requirements in 
paragraphs (e)(1) and (2) of this section.
    (1) Use a gas composition monitor capable of measuring the 
concentration of CH4 on a dry basis that is properly 
operated, calibrated, and maintained according to the requirements 
specified in paragraph (b) of this section. You must either use a gas 
composition monitor that is also capable of measuring the O2 
concentration correcting for excess (infiltration) air or you must 
operate, maintain, and

[[Page 71970]]

calibrate a second monitor capable of measuring the O2 
concentration on a dry basis according to the manufacturer's 
specifications.
    (2) Use Equation HH-10 of this section to correct the measured 
CH4 concentration to 0% oxygen. If multiple CH4 
concentration measurements are made during the reporting year, 
determine F separately for each measurement made during the reporting 
year, and use the results to determine the arithmetic average value of 
F for use in Equation HH-1 of this part.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29NO13.023

Where:

F = Fraction by volume of CH4 in landfill gas (fraction, 
dry basis, corrected to 0% oxygen).
CCH4 = Measured CH4 concentration in landfill 
gas (volume %, dry basis).
20.9c = Defined O2 correction basis, (volume 
%, dry basis).
20.9 = O2 concentration in air (volume %, dry basis).
%O2 = Measured O2 concentration in landfill 
gas (volume %, dry basis).
    (f) The owner or operator shall document the procedures used to 
ensure the accuracy of the estimates of disposal quantities and, if 
applicable, gas flow rate, gas composition, temperature, pressure, and 
moisture content measurements. These procedures include, but are not 
limited to, calibration of weighing equipment, fuel flow meters, and 
other measurement devices. The estimated accuracy of measurements made 
with these devices, and the technical basis for these estimates shall 
be recorded.

0
80. Section 98.345 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.345  Procedures for estimating missing data.

* * * * *
    (c) For missing daily waste disposal quantity data for disposal in 
the reporting year, the substitute value shall be the average daily 
waste disposal quantity for that day of the week as measured on the 
week before and week after the missing daily data.

0
81. Section 98.346 is amended by revising paragraphs (d)(1), (e), (h), 
(i)(5) through (8), and (i)(10) through (12) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.346  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) Degradable organic carbon (DOC) and fraction of DOC 
dissimilated (DOCF) values used in the calculations.
* * * * *
    (e) Fraction of CH4 in landfill gas (F), an indication 
of whether the fraction of CH4 was determined based on 
measured values or the default value, and the methane correction factor 
(MCF) used in the calculations. If an MCF other than the default of 1 
is used, provide an indication of whether active aeration of the waste 
in the landfill was conducted during the reporting year, a description 
of the aeration system, including aeration blower capacity, the 
fraction of the landfill containing waste affected by aeration, the 
total number of hours during the year the aeration blower was operated, 
and other factors used as a basis for the selected MCF value.
* * * * *
    (h) For landfills without gas collection systems, the annual 
methane emissions (i.e., the methane generation, adjusted for 
oxidation, calculated using Equation HH-5 of this subpart), reported in 
metric tons CH4, the oxidation fraction used in the 
calculation, 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 this 
landfill.
    (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 the number of 
destruction devices associated with that measurement location and the 
annual operating hours and the destruction efficiency (percent) for 
each destruction device associated with that measurement location.
    (6) Annual quantity of recovered CH4 (metric tons 
CH4) calculated using Equation HH-4 of this subpart for each 
measurement location.
    (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, the annual operating hours 
of the gas collection system for each measurement location, 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.
    (8) Methane generation corrected for oxidation calculated using 
Equation HH-5 of this subpart, reported in metric tons CH4, 
and the oxidation fraction used in the calculation.
* * * * *
    (10) Methane generation corrected for oxidation calculated using 
Equation HH-7 of this subpart, reported in metric tons CH4, 
and the oxidation fraction used in the calculation.
    (11) Methane emissions calculated using Equation HH-6 of this 
subpart, reported in metric tons CH4, and the oxidation 
fraction used in the calculation.
    (12) Methane emissions calculated using Equation HH-8 of this 
subpart, reported in metric tons CH4, and the oxidation 
fraction used in the calculation.

0
82. Section 98.348 is amended by adding definitions for ``Landfill 
capacity'' and ``Leachate recirculation'' in alphabetical order to read 
as follows:

Sec.  98.348  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Landfill capacity means the maximum amount of solid waste a 
landfill can accept. For the purposes of this subpart, for landfills 
that have a permit, the landfill capacity can be determined in terms of 
volume or mass in the most recent permit issued by the state, local, or 
Tribal agency responsible for regulating the landfill, plus any in-
place waste not accounted for in the most recent permit. If the owner 
or operator chooses to convert from volume to mass to determine its 
capacity, the calculation must include a site-specific density.
    Leachate recirculation means the practice of taking the leachate 
collected from the landfill and reapplying it to the landfill by any of 
one of a variety of methods, including pre-wetting of the waste, direct 
discharge into the working face, spraying, infiltration ponds, vertical 
injection wells, horizontal gravity distribution systems, and pressure 
distribution systems.
* * * * *

0
83. Table HH-1 to Subpart HH is amended by revising the entry for 
``OX'' to read as follows:

[[Page 71971]]

    Table HH-1 to Subpart HH of Part 98--Emissions Factors, Oxidation
                           Factors and Methods
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Factor                       Default value             Units
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                * * * * *
                   Other parameters--All MSW landfills
 
                               * * * * *
OX..........................  See Table HH-4 of this subpart..  ........
 
                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
84. Table HH-2 to Subpart HH is revised to read as follows:

   Table HH-2 to Subpart HH of Part 98--U.S. Per Capita Waste Disposal
                                  Rates
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Waste per capita ton/
                       Year                                cap/yr
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1950..............................................                  0.63
1951..............................................                  0.63
1952..............................................                  0.63
1953..............................................                  0.63
1954..............................................                  0.63
1955..............................................                  0.63
1956..............................................                  0.63
1957..............................................                  0.63
1958..............................................                  0.63
1959..............................................                  0.63
1960..............................................                  0.63
1961..............................................                  0.64
1962..............................................                  0.64
1963..............................................                  0.65
1964..............................................                  0.65
1965..............................................                  0.66
1966..............................................                  0.66
1967..............................................                  0.67
1968..............................................                  0.68
1969..............................................                  0.68
1970..............................................                  0.69
1971..............................................                  0.69
1972..............................................                  0.70
1973..............................................                  0.71
1974..............................................                  0.71
1975..............................................                  0.72
1976..............................................                  0.73
1977..............................................                  0.73
1978..............................................                  0.74
1979..............................................                  0.75
1980..............................................                  0.75
1981..............................................                  0.76
1982..............................................                  0.77
1983..............................................                  0.77
1984..............................................                  0.78
1985..............................................                  0.79
1986..............................................                  0.79
1987..............................................                  0.80
1988..............................................                  0.80
1989..............................................                  0.83
1990..............................................                  0.82
1991..............................................                  0.76
1992..............................................                  0.74
1993..............................................                  0.76
1994..............................................                  0.75
1995..............................................                  0.70
1996..............................................                  0.68
1997..............................................                  0.69
1998..............................................                  0.75
1999..............................................                  0.75
2000..............................................                  0.80
2001..............................................                  0.91
2002..............................................                  1.02
2003..............................................                  1.02
2004..............................................                  1.01
2005..............................................                  0.98
2006..............................................                  0.95
2007..............................................                  0.95
2008..............................................                  0.95
2009 and all later years..........................                  0.95
------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
85. Table HH-4 to Subpart HH is added to read as follows:

     Table HH-4 to Subpart HH of Part 98--Landfill Methane Oxidation
                                Fractions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Use this
                                                             landfill
                 Under these conditions:                      methane
                                                             oxidation
                                                             fraction:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
       I. For all reporting years prior to the 2013 reporting year
------------------------------------------------------------------------
C1: For all landfills regardless of cover type or                   0.10
 methane flux...........................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        II. For the 2013 reporting year and all subsequent years
------------------------------------------------------------------------
C2: For landfills that have a geomembrane (synthetic)                0.0
 cover with less than 12 inches of cover soil for the
 majority of the landfill area containing waste.........
C3: For landfills that do not meet the conditions in C2             0.10
 above, and for which you elect not to determine methane
 flux...................................................
C4: For landfills that do not meet the conditions in C2             0.10
 above and that do not have a soil cover of at least 24
 inches for a majority of the landfill area containing
 waste..................................................
C5: For landfills that have a soil cover of at least 24             0.35
 inches for a majority of the landfill area containing
 waste and for which the methane flux rate is less than
 10 grams per square meter per day (g/m\2\/d)...........
C6: For landfills that have a soil cover of at least 24             0.25
 inches for a majority of the landfill area containing
 waste and for which the methane flux rate is 10 to 70 g/
 m\2\/d.................................................
C7: For landfills that have a soil cover of at least 24             0.10
 inches for a majority of the landfill area containing
 waste and for which the methane flux rate is greater
 than 70 g/m\2\/d.......................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Methane flux rate (in grams per square meter per day; g/m\2\/d) is
  the mass flow rate of methane per unit area at the bottom of the
  surface soil prior to any oxidation and is calculated as follows:

[[Page 71972]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29NO13.024

Where:
MF = Methane flux rate from the landfill in the reporting year 
(grams per square meter per day, g/m\2\/d).
K = unit conversion factor = 10\6\/365 (g/metric ton per days/year) 
or 10\6\/366 for a leap year.
SArea = The surface area of the landfill containing waste at the 
beginning of the reporting year (square meters, m\2\).
GCH4 = Modeled methane generation rate in reporting year 
from Equation HH-1 of this subpart or Equation TT-1 of subpart TT of 
this part, as applicable, except for application with Equation HH-6 
of this subpart (metric tons CH4). For application with 
Equation HH-6 of this subpart, the greater of the modeled methane 
generation rate in reporting year from Equation HH-1 of this subpart 
or Equation TT-1 of this part, as applicable, and the quantity of 
recovered CH4 from Equation HH-4 of this subpart (metric 
tons CH4).
CE = Collection efficiency estimated at landfill, taking into 
account system coverage, operation, and cover system materials from 
Table HH-3 of this subpart. If area by soil cover type information 
is not available, use default value of 0.75 (CE4 in table HH-3 of 
this subpart) for all areas under active influence of the collection 
system.
N = Number of landfill gas measurement locations (associated with a 
destruction device or gas sent off-site). If a single monitoring 
location is used to monitor volumetric flow and CH4 
concentration of the recovered gas sent to one or multiple 
destruction devices, then N=1.
Rn = Quantity of recovered CH4 from Equation 
HH-4 of this subpart for the nth measurement location (metric tons).
fRec,n = Fraction of hours the recovery system associated 
with the nth measurement location was operating (annual operating 
hours/8760 hours per year or annual operating hours/8784 hours per 
year for a leap year).

Subpart II--[AMENDED]

0
86. Section 98.353 is amended by revising the parameters 
``fDest--1'' and ``fDest--2'' of Equation II-6 in 
paragraph (d)(2) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.353  Calculating GHG emissions.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) * * *
* * * * *
fDest--1 = Fraction of hours the primary destruction 
device was operating calculated as the annual hours when the 
destruction device was operating divided by the annual operating 
hours of the biogas recovery system. If the biogas is transported 
off-site for destruction, use fDest = 1.
* * * * *
fDest--2 = Fraction of hours the back-up destruction 
device was operating calculated as the annual hours when the 
destruction device was operating divided by the annual operating 
hours of the biogas recovery system.
* * * * *

Subpart LL--[AMENDED]

0
87. Section 98.386 is amended by:
0
a. Removing and reserving paragraphs (a)(1) and (5).
0
b. Revising paragraph (a)(4), (a)(8), (a)(9)(v), (a)(11)(v), and 
(a)(12) introductory text.
0
c. Removing and reserving paragraph (a)(13).
0
d. Revising paragraphs (a)(14), (15) and (18).
0
e. Removing and reserving paragraph (b)(1).
0
f. Revising paragraphs (b)(4), (b)(5)(v), and (b)(6)(i).
0
g. Removing and reserving paragraph (c)(1).
0
h. Revising paragraphs (c)(4), (c)(5)(v), and (d)(2) and (3).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.386  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (4) Each standard method or other industry standard practice used 
to measure each quantity reported in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
* * * * *
    (8) Each standard method or other industry standard practice used 
to measure each quantity reported in paragraph (a)(6) of this section.
    (9) * * *

[[Page 71973]]

    (v) The calculated CO2 emissions factor in metric tons 
CO2 per barrel or per metric ton of product.
* * * * *
    (11) * * *
    (v) The calculated CO2 emissions factor in metric tons 
CO2 per barrel or metric ton of product.
* * * * *
    (12) For every non-solid product reported in paragraph (a)(6) of 
this section for which Calculation Method 2 of subpart MM of this part 
was used to determine an emissions factor, report:
* * * * *
    (14) For each specific type of biomass that enters the coal-to-
liquid facility to be co-processed with fossil fuel-based feedstock to 
produce a product reported in paragraph (a)(6) of this section, report 
the annual quantity in metric tons or barrels.
    (15) Each standard method or other industry standard practice used 
to measure each quantity reported in paragraph (a)(14) of this section.
* * * * *
    (18) Annual CO2 emissions in metric tons that would 
result from the complete combustion or oxidation of each type of 
biomass feedstock co-processed with fossil fuel-based feedstocks 
reported in paragraph (a)(14) of this section, calculated according to 
Sec.  98.393(c).
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) Each standard method or other industry standard practice used 
to measure each quantity reported in paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
    (5) * * *
    (v) The calculated CO2 emissions factor in metric tons 
per barrel or per metric ton of product.
    (6) * * *
    (i) The density test results in metric tons per barrel.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (4) Each standard method or other industry standard practice used 
to measure each quantity reported in paragraph (c)(2) of this section.
    (5) * * *
    (v) The calculated CO2 emissions factor in metric tons 
CO2 per barrel or per metric ton of product.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) For a product that enters the facility to be further refined or 
otherwise used on site that is a blended feedstock, producers must meet 
the reporting requirements of paragraph (a)(2) of this section by 
reflecting the individual components of the blended feedstock.
    (3) For a product that is produced, imported, or exported that is a 
blended product, producers, importers, and exporters must meet the 
reporting requirements of paragraphs (a)(6), (b)(2), and (c)(2) of this 
section, as applicable, by reflecting the individual components of the 
blended product.

Subpart MM--[AMENDED]

0
88. Section 98.393 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the parameter ``Producti'' of Equation MM-1 in 
paragraph (a)(1).
0
b. Revising the parameter ``Producti'' of Equation MM-1 in 
paragraph (a)(2).
0
c. Revising paragraphs (h)(1) introductory text and (h)(2) introductory 
text.
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.393  Calculating GHG emissions.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
* * * * *
Producti = Annual volume of product ``i'' produced, 
imported, or exported by the reporting party (barrels). For 
refiners, this volume only includes products ex refinery gate, and 
excludes products that entered the refinery but are not reported 
under Sec.  98.396(a)(2). For natural gas liquids, volumes shall 
reflect the individual components of the product as listed in Table 
MM-1 to subpart MM.
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
* * * * *
Producti = Annual mass of product ``i'' produced, 
imported, or exported by the reporting party (metric tons). For 
refiners, this mass only includes products ex refinery gate, and 
excludes products that entered the refinery but are not reported 
under Sec.  98.396(a)(2).
* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (1) A reporter using Calculation Method 1 to determine the emission 
factor of a petroleum product shall calculate the CO2 
emissions associated with that product using Equation MM-8 of this 
section in place of Equation MM-1 of this section.
* * * * *
    (2) A refinery using Calculation Method 1 of this subpart to 
determine the emission factor of a non-crude petroleum feedstock shall 
calculate the CO2 emissions associated with that feedstock 
using Equation MM-9 of this section in place of Equation MM-2 of this 
section.
* * * * *
0
89. Section 98.394 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a)(1) introductory text and (a)(3).
0
b. Adding paragraph (b)(3).
0
c. Revising paragraph (c) introductory text.
0
d. Removing paragraph (d).
    The revisions and addition read as follows:

Sec.  98.394  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

    (a) * * *
    (1) The quantity of petroleum products, natural gas liquids, and 
biomass, shall be determined as follows:
* * * * *
    (3) The annual quantity of crude oil received shall be determined 
according to one of the following methods. You may use an appropriate 
standard method published by a consensus-based standards organization 
or you may use an industry standard practice.
    (b) * * *
    (3) For units and processes that operate continuously with 
infrequent outages, it may not be possible to complete the calibration 
of a flow meter or other measurement device without disrupting normal 
process operation. In such cases, the owner or operator may postpone 
the calibration until the next scheduled maintenance outage. The best 
available information from company records may be used in the interim. 
Such postponements shall be documented in the monitoring plan that is 
required under Sec.  98.3(g)(5).
    (c) Procedures for Calculation Method 2 of this subpart.
* * * * *

0
90. Section 98.395 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) introductory 
text and (b) and removing paragraph (c).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.395  Procedures for estimating missing data.

    (a) Determination of quantity. Whenever the quality assurance 
procedures in Sec.  98.394(a) cannot be followed to measure the 
quantity of one or more petroleum products, natural gas liquids, types 
of biomass, feedstocks, or crude oil during any period (e.g., if a 
meter malfunctions), the following missing data procedures shall be 
used:
* * * * *
    (b) Determination of emission factor. Whenever any of the 
procedures in Sec.  98.394(c) cannot be followed to develop an emission 
factor for any reason, Calculation Method 1 of this subpart must be 
used in place of Calculation Method 2 of this subpart for the entire 
reporting year.

0
91. Section 98.396 is amended by:
0
a. Removing and reserving paragraph (a)(1).
0
b. Removing and reserving paragraphs (a)(4), (5), and (8).
0
c. Revising paragraphs (a)(9) introductory text, (a)(9)(iii), 
(a)(9)(v),

[[Page 71974]]

(a)(10) introductory text, (a)(11) introductory text, and (a)(11)(iii).
0
d. Removing and reserving paragraphs (a)(13) and (15).
0
e. Revising paragraph (a)(18).
0
f. Revising paragraphs (a)(20) through (22).
0
g. Removing paragraph (a)(23).
0
h. Removing and reserving paragraph (b)(1).
0
i. Revising paragraph (b)(2).
0
j. Removing and reserving paragraph (b)(4).
0
k. Revising paragraphs (b)(5) introductory text and (b)(6) introductory 
text.
0
l. Removing and reserving paragraphs (c)(1) and (4).
0
m. Revising paragraphs (c)(5) introductory text, (c)(6) introductory 
text, and (d)(2) and (3).
0
The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.396  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (9) For every feedstock reported in paragraph (a)(2) of this 
section for which Calculation Method 2 of this subpart was used to 
determine an emissions factor, report:
* * * * *
    (iii) The carbon share test results in percent mass.
* * * * *
    (v) The calculated CO2 emissions factor in metric tons 
CO2 per barrel or per metric ton of product.
    (10) For every non-solid feedstock reported in paragraph (a)(2) of 
this section for which Calculation Method 2 of this subpart was used to 
determine an emissions factor, report:
* * * * *
    (11) For every petroleum product and natural gas liquid reported in 
paragraph (a)(6) of this section for which Calculation Method 2 of this 
subpart was used to determine an emissions factor, report:
* * * * *
    (iii) The carbon share test results in percent mass.
* * * * *
    (18) The CO2 emissions in metric tons that would result 
from the complete combustion or oxidation of each type of biomass 
feedstock co-processed with petroleum feedstocks reported in paragraph 
(a)(14) of this section, calculated according to Sec.  98.393(c).
* * * * *
    (20) For all crude oil that enters the refinery, report the annual 
quantity in barrels.
    (21) The 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 (a)(2) of this section.
    (22) Volume of crude oil in barrels that you injected into a crude 
oil supply or reservoir.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
* * * * *
    (2) For each petroleum product and natural gas liquid listed in 
Table MM-1 of this subpart, report the annual quantity in metric tons 
or barrels. For natural gas liquids, quantity shall reflect the 
individual components of the product.
* * * * *
    (5) For each product reported in paragraph (b)(2) of this section 
for which Calculation Method 2 of this subpart 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 of this subpart 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 of this subpart 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 of this subpart used was used to 
determine an emissions factor, report:
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) For a product that enters the refinery to be further refined or 
otherwise used on site that is a blended non-crude feedstock, refiners 
must meet the reporting requirements of paragraph (a)(2) of this 
section by reflecting the individual components of the blended non-
crude feedstock.
    (3) For a product that is produced, imported, or exported that is a 
blended product, refiners, importers, and exporters must meet the 
reporting requirements of paragraphs (a)(6), (b)(2), and (c)(2) of this 
section, as applicable, by reflecting the individual components of the 
blended product.

0
92. Section 98.397 is amended by revising paragraphs (b) and (d) to 
read as follows:

Sec.  98.397  Records that must be retained.

* * * * *
    (b) Reporters shall maintain records to support quantities that are 
reported under this subpart, including records documenting any 
estimations of missing data and the number of calendar days in the 
reporting year for which substitute data procedures were followed. For 
all reported quantities of petroleum products, natural gas liquids, and 
biomass, reporters shall maintain metering, gauging, and other records 
normally maintained in the course of business to document product and 
feedstock flows including the date of initial calibration and the 
frequency of recalibration for the measurement equipment used.
* * * * *
    (d) Reporters shall maintain laboratory reports, calculations and 
worksheets used in the measurement of density and carbon share for any 
petroleum product or natural gas liquid for which CO2 
emissions were calculated using Calculation Method 2.
* * * * *

0
93. Section 98.398 is amended by:
0
a. Adding the definitions for ``Bulk NGLs'' and ``Natural Gas Liquids 
(NGLs)'' in alphabetical order.
0
b. Removing the definition of ``Batch''.
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.398  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Bulk NGLs for purposes of reporting under this subpart means 
mixtures of NGLs that are sold or delivered as undifferentiated 
product.
    Natural Gas Liquids (NGLs) for the purposes of reporting under this 
subpart means hydrocarbons that are separated from natural gas as 
liquids through the process of absorption, condensation, adsorption, or 
other methods, and are sold or delivered as differentiated product. 
Generally, such liquids consist of ethane, propane, butanes, or 
pentanes plus.

0
94. Table MM-1 to Subpart MM is amended by:
0
a. Revising the entries for Ethane, Ethylene, Propane, Propylene, 
Butane, Butylene, Isobutane, and Isobutylene.
0
b. Adding footnotes 3 and 4.

[[Page 71975]]

     Table MM-1 to Subpart MM of Part 98--Default Factors for Petroleum Products and Natural Gas Liquids 1 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Column A:                       Column C:
                                                                      density        Column B:       emission
                            Products                               (metric tons/   carbon share   factor (metric
                                                                       bbl)         (% of mass)    tons CO2/bbl)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Other Petroleum Products and Natural Gas Liquids
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ethane \3\......................................................          0.0579           79.89           0.170
Ethylene \4\....................................................          0.0492           85.63           0.154
Propane \3\.....................................................          0.0806           81.71           0.241
Propylene \3\...................................................          0.0827           85.63           0.260
Butane \3\......................................................          0.0928           82.66           0.281
Butylene \3\....................................................          0.0972           85.63           0.305
Isobutane \3\...................................................          0.0892           82.66           0.270
Isobutylene \3\.................................................          0.0949           85.63           0.298
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The density and emission factors for components of LPG determined at 60 degrees Fahrenheit and saturation
  pressure (LPGs other than ethylene).
\4\ The density and emission factor for ethylene determined at 41 degrees Fahrenheit and saturation pressure.

Subpart NN--[AMENDED]

0
95. Section 98.400 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to 
read as follows:

Sec.  98.400  Definition of the source category.

* * * * *
    (a) Natural gas liquids fractionators are installations that 
fractionate natural gas liquids (NGLs) into their constituent liquid 
products or mixtures of products (ethane, propane, normal butane, 
isobutane or pentanes plus) for supply to downstream facilities.
    (b) Local Distribution Companies (LDCs) are companies that own or 
operate distribution pipelines, not interstate pipelines or intrastate 
pipelines, that physically deliver natural gas to end users and that 
are within a single state that are regulated as separate operating 
companies by State public utility commissions or that operate as 
independent municipally-owned distribution systems. LDCs do not include 
pipelines (both interstate and intrastate) delivering natural gas 
directly to major industrial users and farm taps upstream of the local 
distribution company inlet.
* * * * *

0
96. Section 98.403 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the parameter ``Fuelh'' to Equation NN-2 in 
paragraph (a)(2).
0
b. Revising paragraphs (b)(1) introductory text and (b)(2)(i).
0
c. Revising parameters ``CO2k'' and ``Fuel'' to Equation NN-
4 in paragraph (b)(2)(ii).
0
d. Revising paragraph (b)(3).
0
e. Revising paragraph (b)(4).
0
f. Revising paragraph (c)(2) introductory text.
0
g. Revising parameter ``CO2'' of Equation NN-8 of paragraph 
(c)(2).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.403  Calculating GHG emissions.

    (a) * * *
    (2) * * *
* * * * *
Fuelh = Total annual volume of product ``h'' supplied 
(volume per year, in Mscf for natural gas and bbl for NGLs).
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) For natural gas that is received for redelivery to downstream 
gas transmission pipelines and other local distribution companies, use 
Equation NN-3 of this section and the default values for the 
CO2 emission factors found in Table NN-2 of this subpart. 
Alternatively, reporter-specific CO2 emission factors may be 
used, provided they are developed using methods outlined in Sec.  
98.404.
* * * * *
    (2)(i) For natural gas delivered to large end-users, use Equation 
NN-4 of this section and the default values for the CO2 
emission factors found in Table NN-2 of this subpart. A large end-user 
means any end-user facility receiving greater than or equal to 460,000 
Mscf of natural gas per year. If the LDC does not know the total 
quantity of gas delivered to the end-user facility based on readily 
available information in the LDCs possession, then large end-user means 
any single meter at an end-user facility to which the LDC delivers 
equal to or greater than 460,000 Mscf per year.
    (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).
Fuel = Total annual volume of natural gas supplied to each large 
end-user k, as defined in paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section (Mscf 
per year).
* * * * *
    (3) For the net change in natural gas stored on system by the LDC 
during the reporting year, use Equation NN-5a of this section. For 
natural gas that is received by means other than through the city gate, 
and is not otherwise accounted for by Equation NN-1 or NN-2 of this 
section, use Equation NN-5b of this section.
    (i) For natural gas received by the LDC that is injected into on-
system storage, and/or liquefied and stored, and for gas removed from 
storage and used for deliveries, use Equation NN-5a of this section and 
the default value for the CO2 emission factors found in 
Table NN-2 of this subpart. Alternatively, a reporter-specific 
CO2 emission factor may be

[[Page 71976]]

used, provided it is developed using methods outlined in Sec.  98.404.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29NO13.028

Where:

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).
Fuel1 = Total annual volume of natural gas added to 
storage on-system or liquefied and stored in the reporting year 
(Mscf per year).
Fuel2 = Total annual volume of natural gas that is 
removed from storage or vaporized and removed from storage and used 
for deliveries to customers or other LDCs by the LDC within the 
reporting year (Mscf per year).
EF = Annual average CO2 emission factor for natural gas 
placed into/removed from storage (MT CO2/Mscf).

    (ii) For natural gas received by the LDC that bypassed the city 
gate, use Equation NN-5b of this section. This includes natural gas 
received directly by LDC systems from producers or natural gas 
processing plants from local production, received as a liquid and 
vaporized for delivery, or received from any other source that bypassed 
the city gate. Use the default value for the CO2 emission 
factors found in Table NN-2 of this subpart. Alternatively, a reporter-
specific CO2 emission factor may be used, provided it is 
developed using methods outlined in Sec.  98.404.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29NO13.029

Where:

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).
Fuelz = Total annual volume of natural gas received that 
was not otherwise accounted for by Equation NN-1 or NN-2 of this 
section (natural gas from producers and natural gas processing 
plants from local production, or natural gas that was received as a 
liquid, vaporized and delivered, and any other source that bypassed 
the city gate). (Mscf per year)
EFz = Fuel-specific CO2 emission factor (MT 
CO2/Mscf)

    (4) Calculate the total CO2 emissions that would result 
from the complete combustion or oxidation of the annual supply of 
natural gas to end-users that receive a supply less than 460,000 Mscf 
per year using Equation NN-6 of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29NO13.030

Where:

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) * * *
    (2) Calculate the total CO2 equivalent emissions that 
would result from the combustion or oxidation of fractionated NGLs 
supplied less the quantity received from other fractionators using 
Equation NN-8 of this section.
* * * * *
    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).
* * * * *

0
97. Section 98.404 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a)(5) introductory text, (a)(7), (a)(8) 
introductory text, and (a)(8)(ii).
0
b. Adding paragraph (a)(8)(iii).
0
c. Revising paragraphs (a)(9), (c)(2), and (d)(1) and (2).
0
d. Adding paragraph (d)(3).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  98.404  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

    (a) * * *
    (5) For an LDC using Equation NN-1 or NN-2 of this subpart, the 
point(s) of measurement for the natural gas volume received shall be 
the LDC city gate meter(s).
* * * * *
    (7) An LDC using Equation NN-4 of this subpart shall measure 
natural gas at the large end-user's meter(s). Where a large end-user is 
known to have more than one meter located at their facility, based on 
readily available information in the LDCs possession, the reporter 
shall measure the natural gas at each meter and sum the annual volume 
delivered to all meters located at the end-user's facility to determine 
the total volume delivered to the large end-user. Otherwise, the 
reporter shall consider the total annual volume delivered through each 
single meter at a single particular location to be the volume delivered 
to an individual large end-user.

[[Page 71977]]

    (8) An LDC using Equation NN-5a and/or NN-5b of this subpart shall 
measure natural gas as follows:
* * * * *
    (ii) Fuel2 shall be measured at the meters used for 
measuring on-system storage withdrawals and/or LNG vaporization 
injection.
    (iii) Fuelz shall be measured using established business 
practices.
    (9) An LDC shall measure all natural gas under the following 
standard industry temperature and pressure conditions: Cubic foot of 
gas at a temperature of 60 degrees Fahrenheit and at an absolute 
pressure of one atmosphere.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) When a reporter used the default EF provided in this section to 
calculate Equation NN-2, NN-3, NN-4, NN-5a, NN-5b, or NN-7 of this 
subpart, the appropriate value shall be taken from Table NN-2 of this 
subpart.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) Equipment used to measure quantities in Equations NN-1, NN-2, 
NN-5a and NN-5b of this subpart shall be calibrated prior to its first 
use for reporting under this subpart, using a suitable standard method 
published by a consensus based standards organization or according to 
the equipment manufacturer's directions.
    (2) Equipment used to measure quantities in Equations NN-1, NN-2, 
NN-5a, and NN-5b of this subpart shall be recalibrated at the frequency 
specified by the standard method used or by the manufacturer's 
directions.
    (3) Equipment used to measure quantities in Equations NN-3 and NN-4 
of this subpart shall be recalibrated at the frequency commonly used 
within the industry.

Sec.  98.405  [Amended]

0
98. Section 98.405 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph 
(c)(3).
0
99. Section 98.406 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a)(4) and (7).
0
b. Revising paragraphs (b)(2) and (3).
0
c. Removing and reserving paragraph (b)(4).
0
d. Revising paragraphs (b)(5), (b)(7), (b)(9), and (b)(12) introductory 
text.
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.406  Data reporting requirements.

    (a) * * *
    (4) Annual quantities (in barrels) of y-grade, o-grade, and other 
bulk NGLs:
    (i) Received.
    (ii) Supplied to downstream users that are not fractionated by the 
reporter.
* * * * *
    (7) Annual CO2 mass emissions (metric tons) that would 
result from the combustion or oxidation of fractionated NGLs supplied 
less the quantity received from other fractionators, calculated in 
accordance with Sec.  98.403(c)(2). If the calculated value is 
negative, the reporter shall report the value as zero.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) Annual volume in Mscf of natural gas placed into storage or 
liquefied and stored (Fuel1 in Equation NN-5a).
    (3) Annual volume in Mscf of natural gas withdrawn from on-system 
storage and annual volume in Mscf of vaporized liquefied natural gas 
(LNG) withdrawn from storage for delivery on the distribution system 
(Fuel2 in Equation NN-5a).
    (5) Annual volume in Mscf of natural gas that bypassed the city 
gate(s) and was supplied through the LDC distribution system. This 
includes natural gas from producers and natural gas processing plants 
from local production, or natural gas that was vaporized upon receipt 
and delivered, and any other source that bypassed the city gate 
(Fuelz in Equation NN-5b).
* * * * *
    (7) Annual volume in Mscf of natural gas delivered by the LDC to 
each large end-user as defined in Sec.  98.403(b)(2)(i) of this 
section.
* * * * *
    (9) Annual CO2 emissions (metric tons) that would result 
from the complete combustion or oxidation of the annual supply of 
natural gas to end-users registering less than 460,000 Mscf, calculated 
in accordance with Sec.  98.403(b)(4). If the calculated value is 
negative, the reporter shall report the value as zero.
* * * * *
    (12) The customer name, address, and meter number of each large 
end-user reported in paragraph (b)(7) of this section. Additionally, 
report 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.
* * * * *
0
100. Section 98.407 is amended by revising the introductory text to 
read as follows:

Sec.  98.407  Records that must be retained.

    In addition to the information required by Sec.  98.3(g), the 
reporter shall retain the following records:
* * * * *

0
101. Table NN-1 to subpart NN is revised to read as follows:

  Table NN-1 to Subpart NN of Part 98--Default Factors for Calculation
                      Methodology 1 of This Subpart
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Default
                                                             CO[ihel2]
                                       Default higher        emission
               Fuel                   heating value \1\     factor (kg
                                                            CO[ihel2]/
                                                              MMBtu)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Natural Gas.......................  1.026 MMBtu/Mscf....           53.06
Propane...........................  3.84 MMBtu/bbl......           62.87
Normal butane.....................  4.34 MMBtu/bbl......           64.77
Ethane............................  2.85 MMBtu/bbl......           59.60
Isobutane.........................  4.16 MMBtu/bbl......           64.94
Pentanes plus.....................  4.62 MMBtu/bbl......           70.02
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Conditions for higher heating values presented in MMBtu/bbl are
  60[deg]F and saturation pressure.

0
102. Table NN-1 to subpart NN is revised to read as follows:

   Table NN-2 to Subpart NN of Part 98--Default Values for Calculation
                      Methodology 2 of This Subpart
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Default
                                                             CO[ihel2]
               Fuel                         Unit          emission value
                                                          (MT CO[ihel2]/
                                                             Unit) \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Natural Gas.......................  Mscf................          0.0544
Propane...........................  Barrel..............           0.241
Normal butane.....................  Barrel..............           0.281
Ethane............................  Barrel..............           0.170
Isobutane.........................  Barrel..............           0.270
Pentanes plus.....................  Barrel..............           0.324
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Conditions for emission value presented in MT CO[ihel2]/bbl are
  60[deg]F and saturation pressure.

Subpart PP--[AMENDED]

0
103. Section 98.423 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(3)(i) 
introductory text to read as follows:

Sec.  98.423  Calculating CO2 supply.

    (a) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) For facilities with production process units or production 
wells that capture or extract a CO2 stream and either 
measure it after segregation or do not segregate the flow, calculate 
the total CO2 supplied in accordance with Equation PP-3a in 
paragraph (a)(3).
* * * * *

0
104. Section 98.426 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(4)(i) and 
(ii) and (f)(10) and (11) to read as follows:

[[Page 71978]]

Sec.  98.426  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) * * *
    (i) Quarterly density of the CO2 stream in metric tons 
per standard cubic meter if you report the concentration of the 
CO2 stream in paragraph (b)(3) of this section in weight 
percent.
    (ii) Quarterly density of CO2 in metric tons per 
standard cubic meter if you report the concentration of the 
CO2 stream in paragraph (b)(3) of this section in volume 
percent.
* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (10) Injection of carbon dioxide for enhanced oil and natural gas 
recovery that is covered by subpart UU of this part.
    (11) Geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide that is covered by 
subpart RR of this part.
* * * * *

Subpart QQ--[AMENDED]

0
105. Section 98.433 is amended by revising the parameter 
``St'' of Equation QQ-1 in paragraph (a) and Equation QQ-2 
in paragraph (b) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.433  Calculating GHG contained in pre-charged equipment or 
closed-cell foams.

    (a) * * *
* * * * *
St = Mass of fluorinated GHG per unit of equipment type t 
or foam type t (charge per piece of equipment, kg) or density of 
fluorinated GHG in foam (charge per cubic foot of foam, kg per cubic 
foot).
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
* * * * *
St = Mass in CO2e of the fluorinated GHGs per 
unit of equipment type t or foam type t (charge per piece of 
equipment, kg) or density of fluorinated GHG in foam 
(CO2e per cubic foot of foam, kg CO2e per 
cubic foot).
* * * * *

0
106. Section 98.434 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.434  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) The inputs to the annual submission must be reviewed against 
the import or export transaction records to ensure that the information 
submitted to EPA is being accurately transcribed as the correct 
chemical or blend in the correct pre-charged equipment or closed-cell 
foam in the correct quantities and units.

0
107. Section 98.436 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a)(3), (a)(4), (a)(6)(ii), (a)(6)(iii), (b)(3), 
(b)(4), and (b)(6)(ii) and (iii).
0
b. Removing and reserving paragraphs (a)(5), (a)(6)(iv), (b)(5), and 
(b)(6)(iv).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.436  Data reporting requirements.

    (a) * * *
    (3) For closed-cell foams that are imported inside of equipment, 
the identity of the fluorinated GHG contained in the foam, the mass of 
the fluorinated GHG contained in the foam in each piece of equipment, 
and the number of pieces of equipment imported with each unique 
combination of mass and identity of fluorinated GHG within the closed-
cell foams.
    (4) For closed cell-foams that are not imported inside of 
equipment, the identity of the fluorinated GHG in the foam, the density 
of the fluorinated GHG in the foam (kg fluorinated GHG/cubic foot), and 
the volume of foam imported (cubic feet) for each type of closed-cell 
foam with a unique combination of fluorinated GHG density and identity.
* * * * *
    (6) * * *
    (ii) For closed-cell foams that are imported inside of equipment, 
the mass of the fluorinated GHGs in CO2e contained in the 
foam in each piece of equipment and the number of pieces of equipment 
imported for each equipment type.
    (iii) For closed-cell foams that are not imported inside of 
equipment, the density in CO2e of the fluorinated GHGs in 
the foam (kg CO2e/cubic foot) and the volume of foam 
imported (cubic feet) for each type of closed-cell foam.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) For closed-cell foams that are exported inside of equipment, 
the identity of the fluorinated GHG contained in the foam in each piece 
of equipment, the mass of the fluorinated GHG contained in the foam in 
each piece of equipment, and the number of pieces of equipment exported 
with each unique combination of mass and identity of fluorinated GHG 
within the closed-cell foams.
    (4) For closed-cell foams that are not exported inside of 
equipment, the identity of the fluorinated GHG in the foam, the density 
of the fluorinated GHG in the foam (kg fluorinated GHG/cubic foot), and 
the volume of foam exported (cubic feet) for each type of closed-cell 
foam with a unique combination of fluorinated GHG density and identity.
* * * * *
    (6) * * *
    (ii) For closed-cell foams that are exported inside of equipment, 
the mass of the fluorinated GHGs in CO2e contained in the 
foam in each piece of equipment and the number of pieces of equipment 
imported for each equipment type.
    (iii) For closed-cell foams that are not exported inside of 
equipment, the density in CO2e of the fluorinated GHGs in 
the foam (kg CO2 e/cubic foot) and the volume of foam 
imported (cubic feet) for each type of closed-cell foam.
* * * * *

0
108. Section 98.438 is amended by revising the definitions for 
``Closed-cell foam'' and ``Pre-charged electrical equipment component'' 
to read as follows:

Sec.  98.438  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Closed-cell foam means any foam product, excluding packaging foam, 
that is constructed with a closed-cell structure and a blowing agent 
containing a fluorinated GHG. Closed-cell foams include but are not 
limited to polyurethane (PU) foam contained in equipment, PU continuous 
and discontinuous panel foam, PU one component foam, PU spray foam, 
extruded polystyrene (XPS) boardstock foam, and XPS sheet foam. 
Packaging foam means foam used exclusively during shipment or storage 
to temporarily enclose items.
* * * * *
    Pre-charged electrical equipment component means any portion of 
electrical equipment that is charged with a fluorinated greenhouse gas 
prior to sale or distribution or offer for sale or distribution in 
interstate commerce.

Subpart RR--[AMENDED]

0
109. Section 98.443 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the parameter ``Sr,p'' to Equation RR-2 in 
paragraph (b)(2).
0
b. Revising the last sentence of paragraph (d)(3) introductory text.
0
c. Revising the parameter ``CO2FI'' of Equation RR-12 in 
paragraph (f)(2).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.443  Calculating CO2 geologic sequestration.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) * * *
* * * * *
Sr,p = Quarterly volume of contents in containers r 
redelivered to another facility without being injected into your 
well in quarter p (standard cubic meters).
* * * * *
    (d) * * *

[[Page 71979]]

    (3) * * * The considerations you intend to use to calculate 
CO2 from produced fluids for the mass balance equation must 
be described in your approved MRV plan in accordance with Sec.  
98.448(a)(5).
* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (2) * * *
* * * * *
CO2FI = Total annual CO2 mass emitted (metric 
tons) from equipment leaks and vented emissions of CO2 
from equipment located on the surface between the flow meter used to 
measure injection quantity and the injection wellhead, for which a 
calculation procedure is provided in subpart W of this part.

0
110. Section 98.446 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(5) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  98.446  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (5) The standard or method used to calculate each value in 
paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3) of this section.
* * * * *

Subpart SS--[AMENDED]

0
111. Section 98.453 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (d).
0
b. Revising paragraph (h).
0
c. Revising the parameter ``MF'' of Equation SS-6 in paragraph (i).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.453  Calculating GHG emissions.

* * * * *
    (d) Estimate the mass of SF6 or PFCs disbursed to 
customers in new equipment or cylinders over the period p by monitoring 
the mass flow of the SF6 or PFCs into the new equipment or 
cylinders using a flowmeter, or by weighing containers before and after 
gas from containers is used to fill equipment or cylinders, or by using 
the nameplate capacity of the equipment.
* * * * *
    (h) If the mass of SF6 or the PFC disbursed to customers 
in new equipment or cylinders over the period p is determined by using 
the nameplate capacity, or by using the nameplate capacity of the 
equipment and calculating the partial shipping charge, use the methods 
in either paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this section.
    (1) Determine the equipment's actual nameplate capacity, by 
measuring the nameplate capacities of a representative sample of each 
make and model and calculating the mean value for each make and model 
as specified at Sec.  98.454(f).
    (2) If equipment is shipped with a partial charge, calculate the 
partial shipping charge by multiplying the nameplate capacity of the 
equipment by the ratio of the densities of the partial charge to the 
full charge.
    (i) * * *
* * * * *
MF = The total annual mass of the SF6 or PFCs, in pounds, used to 
fill equipment during equipment installation at electric 
transmission or distribution facilities.
* * * * *

0
112. Section 98.456 is amended by revising paragraphs (m), (o), and (p) 
to read as follows:

Sec.  98.456  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (m) The values for EFci of Equation SS-5 of this subpart 
for each hose and valve combination and the associated valve fitting 
sizes and hose diameters.
* * * * *
    (o) If the mass of SF6 or the PFC disbursed to customers 
in new equipment over the period p is determined according to the 
methods required in Sec.  98.453(h), report the mean value of nameplate 
capacity in pounds for each make, model, and group of conditions.
    (p) If the mass of SF6 or the PFC disbursed to customers 
in new equipment over the period p is determined according to the 
methods required in Sec.  98.453(h), report the number of samples and 
the upper and lower bounds on the 95 percent confidence interval for 
each make, model, and group of conditions.
* * * * *

Subpart TT--[AMENDED]

0
113. Section 98.460 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(2)(xiii) to 
read as follows:

Sec.  98.460  Definition of the source category.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (xiii) Other waste material that has a DOC value of 0.3 weight 
percent (on a wet basis) or less. DOC value must be determined using a 
60-day anaerobic biodegradation test procedure identified in Sec.  
98.464(b)(4)(i).
* * * * *

0
114. Section 98.463 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the parameter ``DOCF'' of Equation TT-1 in 
paragraph (a)(1).
0
b. Removing the parameter ``Fx'' of Equation TT-1 and adding 
in its place the parameter ``F''.
0
c. Revising Equation TT-4b in paragraph (a)(2)(ii)(C).
0
d. Revising the parameter ``OX'' of Equation TT-6 in paragraph (b)(1).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.463  Calculating GHG emissions.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
* * * * *
DOCF = Fraction of DOC dissimilated (fraction); use the 
default value of 0.5. If measured values of DOC are available using 
the 60-day anaerobic biodegradation test procedure identified in 
Sec.  98.464(b)(4)(i), use a default value of 1.0.
* * * * *
F = Fraction by volume of CH4 in landfill gas (fraction, 
dry basis, corrected to 0% oxygen). If you have a gas collection 
system, use the annual average CH4 concentration from 
measurement data for the current reporting year; otherwise, use the 
default value of 0.5.
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (C) * * *
* * * * *
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29NO13.025

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
* * * * *
OX = Oxidation fraction from Table HH-4 of subpart HH of this part.
* * * * *

0
115. Section 98.464 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (b) introductory text.
0
b. Revising Equation TT-7 in paragraph (b)(4)(i)(E).

[[Page 71980]]

0
c. Removing the parameters ``DOCF'', 
``MCDcontrol'', and ``MCcontrol'' of Equation TT-
7 in paragraph (b)(4)(i)(E).
0
d. Revising paragraph (c).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.464  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) For each waste stream placed in the landfill during the 
reporting year for which you choose to determine volatile solids 
concentration and/or a waste stream-specific DOCX, you must 
collect and test a representative sample of that waste stream using the 
methods specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(4) of this section, 
as applicable.
* * * * *
    (4) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (E) * * *
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29NO13.026
    
Where:

DOCX = Degradable organic content of the waste stream in 
Year X (weight fraction, wet basis)
MCDsample,x = Mass of carbon degraded in the waste stream 
sample in Year X as determined in paragraph (b)(4)(i)(C) of this 
section [milligrams (mg)].
Msample,x = Mass of waste stream sample used in the 
anaerobic degradation test in Year X (mg, wet basis).
* * * * *
    (c) For each waste stream that was historically managed in the 
landfill for which you choose to determine volatile solids 
concentration and/or a waste stream-specific DOCX, you must 
determine volatile solids concentration or DOCX of the waste 
stream as initially placed in the landfill using the methods specified 
in paragraph (c)(1) or (2) of this section, as applicable.
    (1) If you can identify a similar waste stream to the waste stream 
that was historically managed in the landfill, you must determine the 
volatile solids concentration or DOCX of the similar waste 
stream using the applicable procedures in paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) 
of this section.
    (2) If you cannot identify a similar waste stream to the waste 
stream that was historically managed in the landfill, you may determine 
the volatile solids concentration or DOCX of the 
historically managed waste stream using process knowledge. You must 
document the basis for the volatile solids concentration or 
DOCX value as determined through process knowledge.
* * * * *

0
116. Section 98.466 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (b)(1).
0
b. Adding paragraph (b)(5).
0
c. Revising paragraph (c) introductory text.
0
d. Removing and reserving paragraph (c)(1).
0
e. Revising paragraphs (c)(2), (c)(3) introductory text, and (c)(4) 
introductory text.
0
f. Adding paragraph (c)(5).
0
g. Revising paragraph (d)(3).
0
h. Revising paragraph (h).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  98.466  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) The number of waste steams (including ``Other Industrial Solid 
Waste (not otherwise listed)'' and ``Inerts'') for which Equation TT-1 
of this subpart is used to calculate modeled CH4 generation.
* * * * *
    (5) For each waste stream, the decay rate (k) value used in the 
calculations.
    (c) Report the following historical waste information:
* * * * *
    (2) For each waste stream identified in paragraph (b) of this 
section, the method(s) for estimating historical waste disposal 
quantities and the range of years for which each method applies.
    (3) For each waste stream identified in paragraph (b) of this 
section for which Equation TT-2 of this subpart is used, provide:
* * * * *
    (4) If Equation TT-4a of this subpart is used, provide:
* * * * *
    (5) If Equation TT-4b of this subpart is used, provide:
    (i) WIP (i.e., the quantity of waste in-place at the start of the 
reporting year from design drawings or engineering estimates (metric 
tons) or, for closed landfills for which waste in-place quantities are 
not available, the landfill's design capacity).
    (ii) The cumulative quantity of waste placed in the landfill for 
the years for which disposal quantities are available from company 
record or from Equation TT-3 of this part.
    (iii) YrLast.
    (iv) YrOpen.
    (v) NYrData.
    (d) * * *
    (3) For each waste stream, the degradable organic carbon 
(DOCX) value (mass fraction) for the specified year and an 
indication as to whether this was the default value from Table TT-1 to 
this subpart, a measured value using a 60-day anaerobic biodegradation 
test as specified in Sec.  98.464(b)(4)(i), or a value based on total 
and volatile solids measurements as specified in Sec.  
98.464(b)(4)(ii). If DOCx was determined by a 60-day 
anaerobic biodegradation test, specify the test method used.
* * * * *
    (h) For landfills with gas collection systems, in addition to the 
reporting requirements in paragraphs (a) through (f) of this section, 
provide:
    (1) The annual methane generation, adjusted for oxidation, 
calculated using Equation TT-6 of this subpart, reported in metric tons 
CH4.
    (2) The oxidation factor used in Equation TT-6 of this subpart.
    (3) All information required under 40 CFR 98.346(i)(1) through (7) 
and 40 CFR 98.346(i)(9) through (12).

0
117. Section 98.467 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  98.467  Records that must be retained.

    In addition to the information required by Sec.  98.3(g), you must 
retain the calibration records for all monitoring equipment, including 
the method or manufacturer's specification used for calibration, and 
all measurement data used for the purposes of paragraphs Sec.  
98.460(c)(2)(xii) or (xiii) or used to determine waste stream-specific 
DOCX values for use in Equation TT-1 of this subpart.

0
118. Section 98.468 is amended by adding a definition of ``Industrial 
sludge'' in alphabetical order to read as follows:

Sec.  98.468  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Industrial sludge means the residual, semi-solid material left from 
industrial wastewater treatment processes or wet air pollution control 
devices (e.g., wet scrubbers). Industrial sludge includes underflow 
material collected in primary or secondary clarifiers, settling basins,

[[Page 71981]]

or precipitation tanks as well as dredged materials from wastewater 
tanks or impoundments. Industrial sludge also includes the semi-solid 
materials remaining after these materials are dewatered via a belt 
process, centrifuge, or similar dewatering process.
* * * * *

0
119. Table TT-1 to subpart TT is amended by:
0
a. Revising the first four entries.
0
b. Adding a new entry following ``Construction and Demolition''.

     Table TT-1 to Subpart TT--Default DOC and Decay Rate Values for
                       Industrial Waste Landfills
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 DOC                    k
                               (weight    k  [dry   [moderate   k  [wet
     Industry/waste type      fraction,   climate    climate    climate
                                 wet     \a\]  (yr  \a\]  (yr  \a\]  (yr
                                basis)      -1)        -1)        -1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Food Processing (other than        0.22       0.06       0.12       0.18
 industrial sludge).........
Pulp and Paper (other than         0.20       0.02       0.03       0.04
 industrial sludge).........
Wood and Wood Product (other       0.43       0.02       0.03       0.04
 than industrial sludge)....
Construction and Demolition.       0.08       0.02       0.03       0.04
Industrial Sludge...........       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].
(1) Dry climate = precipitation plus recirculated leachate less than 20
  inches/year
(2) Moderate climate = precipitation plus recirculated leachate from 20
  to 40 inches/year (inclusive)
(3) 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.

Subpart UU--[AMENDED]

0
120. Section 98.473 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the parameter ``D'' of Equation UU-2 in paragraph (a)(2).
0
b. Revising the parameter ``Sr,p'' of Equation UU-2 in 
paragraph (b)(2).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  98.473  Calculating CO2 received.

    (a) * * *
    (2) * * *
* * * * *
D = Density of CO2 at standard conditions (metric tons 
per standard cubic meter): 0.0018682.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) * * *
* * * * *
Sr,p = Quarterly volume of contents in containers r that 
is redelivered to another facility without being injected into your 
well in quarter p (standard cubic meters).
* * * * *

0
121. Section 98.476 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(5) and adding 
paragraph (e) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.476  Data reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (5) The standard or method used to calculate each value in 
paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3) of this section.
* * * * *
    (e) Report the following:
    (1) Whether the facility received a Research and Development 
project exemption from reporting under 40 CFR part 98, subpart RR, for 
this reporting year. If you received an exemption, report the start and 
end dates of the exemption approved by EPA.
    (2) Whether the facility includes a well or group of wells where a 
CO2 stream was injected into subsurface geologic formations 
to enhance the recovery of oil during this reporting year.
    (3) Whether the facility includes a well or group of wells where a 
CO2 stream was injected into subsurface geologic formations 
to enhance the recovery of natural gas during this reporting year.
    (4) Whether the facility includes a well or group of wells where a 
CO2 stream was injected into subsurface geologic formations 
for acid gas disposal during this reporting year.
    (5) Whether the facility includes a well or group of wells where a 
CO2 stream was injected for a purpose other than those 
listed in paragraphs (e)(1) through (4) of this section. If you 
injected CO2 for another purpose, report the purpose of the 
injection.

[FR Doc. 2013-27996 Filed 11-27-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P