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

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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

(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

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

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

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.

    (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

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.

                               * * * * * *
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
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    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.

[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:

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.

* * * * *

    (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) * * *
* * * * *