E9 5711 PDF

Friday,
April 10, 2009
Part II
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Parts 86, 87, 89, et al.
Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse
Gases; Proposed Rule
VerDate Nov<24>2008 15:41 Apr 09, 2009 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\10APP2.SGM 10APP2
16448 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 68 / Friday, April 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20004. www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at

AGENCY Such deliveries are only accepted the Air Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West,
during the Docket’s normal hours of Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave.,
40 CFR Parts 86, 87, 89, 90, 94, 98, 600, operation, and special arrangements NW., Washington, DC. This Docket
1033, 1039, 1042, 1045, 1048, 1051, should be made for deliveries of boxed Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
1054, and 1065 information. p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
Instructions: Direct your comments to legal holidays. The telephone number
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508; FRL–8782–1]
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– for the Public Reading Room is (202)
RIN 2060–A079 0508. EPA’s policy is that all comments 566–1744, and the telephone number for
received will be included in the public the Air Docket is (202) 566–1742.
Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse docket without change and may be
Gases made available online at http:// FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
www.regulations.gov, including any Carole Cook, Climate Change Division,
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Office of Atmospheric Programs (MC–
Agency (EPA). personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information 6207J), Environmental Protection
ACTION: Proposed rule. Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
claimed to be CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Washington, DC 20460; telephone
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing a regulation
Do not submit information that you number: (202) 343–9263; fax number:
to require reporting of greenhouse gas (202) 343–2342; e-mail address:
emissions from all sectors of the consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through http:// [email protected]. For
economy. The rule would apply to fossil technical information, contact the
fuel suppliers and industrial gas www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The
http://www.regulations.gov Web site is Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule Hotline
suppliers, as well as to direct at telephone number: (877) 444–1188; or
greenhouse gas emitters. The proposed an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity e-mail: [email protected]. To obtain
rule does not require control of information about the public hearings or
greenhouse gases, rather it requires only or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. to register to speak at the hearings,
that sources above certain threshold please go to http://www.epa.gov/
levels monitor and report emissions. If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through http:// climatechange/emissions/
DATES: Comments must be received on ghgrulemaking.html. Alternatively,
www.regulations.gov your e-mail
or before June 9, 2009. There will be two address will be automatically captured contact Carole Cook at 202–343–9263.
public hearings. One hearing was held and included as part of the comment
on April 6 and 7, 2009, in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
that is placed in the public docket and
Washington, DC, area (One Potomac made available on the Internet. If you Additional Information on Submitting
Yard, 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, submit an electronic comment, EPA Comments: To expedite review of your
VA 22202). One hearing will be on April recommends that you include your comments by Agency staff, you are
16, 2009 in Sacramento, CA name and other contact information in encouraged to send a separate copy of
(Sacramento Convention Center, 1400 J the body of your comment and with any your comments, in addition to the copy
Street, Sacramento, CA 95814). The disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA you submit to the official docket, to
April 16, 2009 hearing will begin at 9 cannot read your comment due to Carole Cook, U.S. EPA, Office of
a.m. local time. technical difficulties and cannot contact Atmospheric Programs, Climate Change
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, you for clarification, EPA may not be Division, Mail Code 6207–J,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– able to consider your comment. Washington, DC, 20460, telephone (202)
OAR–2008–0508, by one of the Electronic files should avoid the use of 343–9263, e-mail
following methods: special characters, any form of [email protected].
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// encryption, and be free of any defects or Regulated Entities. The Administrator
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online viruses. determines that this action is subject to
instructions for submitting comments. Docket: All documents in the docket the provisions of CAA section 307(d).
• E-mail: [email protected]. are listed in the http:// See CAA section 307(d)(1)(V) (the
• Fax: (202) 566–1741. www.regulations.gov index. Although provisions of section 307(d) apply to
• Mail: Environmental Protection listed in the index, some information is ‘‘such other actions as the Administrator
Agency, EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other may determine.’’). This is a proposed
Mailcode 6102T, Attention Docket ID information whose disclosure is regulation. If finalized, these regulations
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508, 1200 restricted by statute. Certain other would affect owners and operators of
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., material, such as copyrighted material, fuel and chemicals suppliers, direct
Washington, DC 20460. will be publicly available only in hard emitters of GHGs and manufacturers of
• Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, copy. Publicly available docket mobile sources and engines. Regulated
Public Reading Room, EPA West materials are available either categories and entities would include
Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution electronically in http:// those listed in Table 1 of this preamble:
TABLE 1—EXAMPLES OF AFFECTED ENTITIES BY CATEGORY

Category NAICS Examples of affected facilities
General Stationary Fuel Combustion ........................ Facilities operating boilers, process heaters, incinerators, turbines, and internal
Sources. combustion engines:
211 Extractors of crude petroleum and natural gas.
321 Manufacturers of lumber and wood products.
322 Pulp and paper mills.
325 Chemical manufacturers.
324 Petroleum refineries, and manufacturers of coal products.
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 68 / Friday, April 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 16449
TABLE 1—EXAMPLES OF AFFECTED ENTITIES BY CATEGORY—Continued

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

331 Steel works, blast furnaces.
332 Electroplating, plating, polishing, anodizing, and coloring.
336 Manufacturers of motor vehicle parts and accessories.
221 Electric, gas, and sanitary services.
622 Health services.
611 Educational services.
Electricity Generation ................................ 221112 Fossil-fuel fired electric generating units, including units owned by Federal and mu-
nicipal governments and units located in Indian Country.
Adipic Acid Production .............................. 325199 Adipic acid manufacturing facilities.
Aluminum Production ................................ 331312 Primary Aluminum production facilities.
Ammonia Manufacturing ........................... 325311 Anhydrous and aqueous ammonia manufacturing facilities.
Cement Production ................................... 327310 Owners and operators of Portland Cement manufacturing plants.
Electronics Manufacturing ........................ 334111 Microcomputers manufacturing facilities.
334413 Semiconductor, photovoltaic (solid-state) device manufacturing facilities.
334419 LCD unit screens manufacturing facilities.
MEMS manufacturing facilities.
Ethanol Production ................................... 325193 Ethyl alcohol manufacturing facilities.
Ferroalloy Production ................................ 331112 Ferroalloys manufacturing facilities.
Fluorinated GHG Production .................... 325120 Industrial gases manufacturing facilities.
Food Processing ....................................... 311611 Meat processing facilities.
311411 Frozen fruit, juice, and vegetable manufacturing facilities.
311421 Fruit and vegetable canning facilities.
Glass Production ...................................... 327211 Flat glass manufacturing facilities.
327213 Glass container manufacturing facilities.
327212 Other pressed and blown glass and glassware manufacturing facilities.
HCFC–22 Production and HFC–23 De- 325120 Chlorodifluoromethane manufacturing facilities.
struction.
Hydrogen Production ................................ 325120 Hydrogen manufacturing facilities.
Iron and Steel Production ......................... 331111 Integrated iron and steel mills, steel companies, sinter plants, blast furnaces, basic
oxygen process furnace shops.
Lead Production ........................................ 331419 Primary lead smelting and refining facilities.
331492 Secondary lead smelting and refining facilities.
Lime Production ........................................ 327410 Calcium oxide, calcium hydroxide, dolomitic hydrates manufacturing facilities.
Magnesium Production ............................. 331419 Primary refiners of nonferrous metals by electrolytic methods.
331492 Secondary magnesium processing plants.
Nitric Acid Production ............................... 325311 Nitric acid manufacturing facilities.
Oil and Natural Gas Systems ................... 486210 Pipeline transportation of natural gas.
221210 Natural gas distribution facilities.
325212 Synthetic rubber manufacturing facilities.
Petrochemical Production ......................... 32511 Ethylene dichloride manufacturing facilities.
325199 Acrylonitrile, ethylene oxide, methanol manufacturing facilities.
325110 Ethylene manufacturing facilities.
325182 Carbon black manufacturing facilities.
Petroleum Refineries ................................ 324110 Petroleum refineries.
Phosphoric Acid Production ..................... 325312 Phosphoric acid manufacturing facilities.
Pulp and Paper Manufacturing ................. 322110 Pulp mills.
322121 Paper mills.
322130 Paperboard mills.
Silicon Carbide Production ....................... 327910 Silicon carbide abrasives manufacturing facilities.
Soda Ash Manufacturing .......................... 325181 Alkalies and chlorine manufacturing facilities.
Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) from Electrical 221121 Electric bulk power transmission and control facilities.
Equipment.
Titanium Dioxide Production ..................... 325188 Titanium dioxide manufacturing facilities.
Underground Coal Mines .......................... 212113 Underground anthracite coal mining operations.
212112 Underground bituminous coal mining operations.
Zinc Production ......................................... 331419 Primary zinc refining facilities.
331492 Zinc dust reclaiming facilities, recovering from scrap and/or alloying purchased met-
als.
Landfills ..................................................... 562212 Solid waste landfills.
221320 Sewage treatment facilities.
322110 Pulp mills.
322121 Paper mills.
322122 Newsprint mills.
311611 Meat processing facilities.
Wastewater Treatment ............................. 322110 Pulp mills.
322121 Paper mills.
322122 Newsprint mills.
TABLE 1—EXAMPLES OF AFFECTED ENTITIES BY CATEGORY—Continued

311611 Meat processing facilities.

325193 Ethanol manufacturing facilities.
324110 Petroleum refineries.
Manure Management ................................ 112111 Beef cattle feedlots.
112120 Dairy cattle and milk production facilities.
112210 Hog and pig farms.
112310 Chicken egg production facilities.
112330 Turkey Production.
112320 Broilers and Other Meat type Chicken Production.
Suppliers of Coal and Coal-based Prod- 212111 Bituminous, and lignite coal surface mining facilities.
ucts.
212113 Anthracite coal mining facilities.
212112 Underground bituminous coal mining facilities.
Suppliers of Coal Based Liquids Fuels .... 211111 Coal liquefaction at mine sites.
Suppliers of Petroleum Products .............. 324110 Petroleum refineries.
Suppliers of Natural Gas and NGLs ......... 221210 Natural gas distribution facilities.
211112 Natural gas liquid extraction facilities.
Suppliers of Industrial GHGs .................... 325120 Industrial gas manufacturing facilities.
Suppliers of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) .......... 325120 Industrial gas manufacturing facilities.
Mobile Sources ......................................... 336112 Light-duty vehicles and trucks manufacturing facilities.
333618 Heavy-duty, non-road, aircraft, locomotive, and marine diesel engine manufac-
turing.
336120 Heavy-duty vehicle manufacturing facilities.
336312 Small non-road, and marine spark-ignition engine manufacturing facilities.
336999 Personal watercraft manufacturing facilities.
336991 Motorcycle manufacturing facilities.
Table 1 of this preamble is not proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart A. If source categories (by subpart) that they
intended to be exhaustive, but rather you have questions regarding the may need to (1) consider in their facility
provides a guide for readers regarding applicability of this action to a applicability determination, and (2)
facilities likely to be regulated by this particular facility, consult the person include in their reporting. For each
action. Table 1 of this preamble lists the listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER source category, activity, or facility type
types of facilities that EPA is now aware INFORMATION CONTACT section. (e.g., electricity generation, aluminum
could be potentially affected by this Many facilities that would be affected production), Table 2 of this preamble
action. Other types of facilities not by the proposed rule have GHG identifies the subparts that are likely to
emissions from multiple source
listed in the table could also be subject be relevant. The table should only be
categories listed in Table 1 of this
to reporting requirements. To determine seen as a guide. Additional subparts
preamble. Table 2 of this preamble has
whether your facility is affected by this may be relevant for a given reporter.
been developed as a guide to help
action, you should carefully examine potential reporters subject to the Similarly, not all listed subparts would
the applicability criteria found in mandatory reporting rule identify the be relevant for all reporters.
TABLE 2—SOURCE CATEGORIES AND RELEVANT SUBPARTS

Source category (and main applicable subpart) Subparts recommended for review to determine applicability
General Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources ......................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion.
Electricity Generation ............................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion, Electricity Generation, Suppliers
of CO2, Electric Power Systems.
Adipic Acid Production ............................................................................. Adipic Acid Production, General Stationary Fuel Combustion.
Aluminum Production ............................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion.
Ammonia Manufacturing ........................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion, Hydrogen, Nitric Acid, Petroleum
Refineries, Suppliers of CO2.
Cement Production ................................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion, Suppliers of CO2.
Electronics Manufacturing ........................................................................ General Stationary Fuel Combustion.
Ethanol Production ................................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion, Landfills, Wastewater Treatment.
Ferroalloy Production ............................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion.
Fluorinated GHG Production .................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion.
Food Processing ....................................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion, Landfills, Wastewater Treatment.
Glass Production ...................................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion.
HCFC–22 Production and HFC–23 Destruction ...................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion.
Hydrogen Production ................................................................................ General Stationary Fuel Combustion, Petrochemicals, Petroleum Refin-
eries, Suppliers of Industrial GHGs, Suppliers of CO2.
Iron and Steel Production ......................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion, Suppliers of CO2.
Lead Production ....................................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion.
Lime Manufacturing .................................................................................. General Stationary Fuel Combustion.
TABLE 2—SOURCE CATEGORIES AND RELEVANT SUBPARTS—Continued

Source category (and main applicable subpart) Subparts recommended for review to determine applicability
Magnesium Production ............................................................................. General Stationary Fuel Combustion.

Nitric Acid Production ............................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion, Adipic Acid.
Oil and Natural Gas Systems ................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion, Petroleum Refineries, Suppliers
of Petroleum Products, Suppliers of Natural Gas and NGL, Suppliers
of CO2.
Petrochemical Production ......................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion, Ammonia, Petroleum Refineries.
Petroleum Refineries ................................................................................ General Stationary Fuel Combustion, Hydrogen, Landfills, Wastewater
Treatment, Suppliers of Petroleum Products.
Phosphoric Acid Production ..................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion.
Pulp and Paper Manufacturing ................................................................. General Stationary Fuel Combustion, Landfills, Wastewater Treatment.
Silicon Carbide Production ....................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion.
Soda Ash Manufacturing .......................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion.
Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) from Electrical Equipment ............................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion.
Titanium Dioxide Production .................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion.
Underground Coal Mines ......................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion, Suppliers of Coal.
Zinc Production ......................................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion.
Landfills ..................................................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion, Ethanol, Food Processing, Petro-
leum Refineries, Pulp and Paper.
Wastewater Treatment ............................................................................. General Stationary Fuel Combustion, Ethanol, Food Processing, Petro-
leum Refineries, Pulp and Paper.
Manure Management ............................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion.
Suppliers of Coal ...................................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion, Underground Coal Mines.
Suppliers of Coal-based Liquid Fuels ...................................................... Suppliers of Coal, Suppliers of Petroleum Products.
Suppliers of Petroleum Products .............................................................. General Stationary Fuel Combustion, Oil and Natural Gas Systems.
Suppliers of Natural Gas and NGLs ........................................................ General Stationary Fuel Combustion, Oil and Natural Gas Systems,
Suppliers of CO2.
Suppliers of Industrial GHGs .................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion, Hydrogen Production, Suppliers
of CO2.
Suppliers of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) .......................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion, Electricity Generation, Ammonia,
Cement, Hydrogen, Iron and Steel, Suppliers of Industrial GHGs.
Mobile Sources ......................................................................................... General Stationary Fuel Combustion.
Acronyms and Abbreviations. The EGUs electrical generating units MSHA Mine Safety and Health
following acronyms and abbreviations EIA Energy Information Administration Administration
are used in this document. EISA Energy Independence and Security MSW municipal solid waste
Act of 2007 MW megawatts
A/C air conditioning EO Executive Order N2O nitrous oxide
AERR Air Emissions Reporting Rule EOR enhanced oil recovery NAAQS national ambient air quality
ANPR advance notice of proposed EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency standard
rulemaking EU European Union NACAA National Association of Clean Air
ARP Acid Rain Program FTP Federal Test Procedure Agencies
ASME American Society of Mechanical FY2008 fiscal year 2008 NAICS North American Industry
Engineers GHG greenhouse gas Classification System
ASTM American Society for Testing and GWP global warming potential NEI National Emissions Inventory
Materials HCFC–22 chlorodifluoromethane (or NESHAP national emission standards for
BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics CHClF2) hazardous air pollutants
CAA Clean Air Act
HCFCs hydrochlorofluorocarbons NF3 nitrogen trifluoride
CAFE Corporate Average Fuel Economy
HCl hydrogen chloride NGLs natural gas liquids
CARB California Air Resources Board
HFC–23 trifluoromethane (or CHF3) NIOSH National Institute for Occupational
CBI confidential business information
HFCs hydrofluorocarbons Safety and Health
CCAR California Climate Action Registry
CDX central data exchange HFEs hydrofluorinated ethers NSPS new source performance standards
CEMS continuous emission monitoring HHV higher heating value NSR New Source Review
system(s) ICR information collection request NTTAA National Technology Transfer and
CERR Consolidated Emissions Reporting IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Advancement Act of 1995
Rule Change O3 ozone
cf cubic feet ISO International Organization for ODS ozone-depleting substance(s)
CFCs chlorofluorocarbons Standardization OMB Office of Management and Budget
CFR Code of Federal Regulations kg kilograms ORIS Office of Regulatory Information
CH4 methane LandGEM Landfill Gas Emissions Model Systems
CHP combined heat and power LCD liquid crystal display PFCs perfluorocarbons
CO2 carbon dioxide LDCs local natural gas distribution PIN personal identification number
CO2e CO2-equivalent companies POTWs publicly owned treatment works
COD chemical oxygen demand LEDs light emitting diodes PSD Prevention of Significant Deterioration
DE destruction efficiency LNG liquified natural gas PV photovoltaic
DOD U.S. Department of Defense LPG liquified petroleum gas QA quality assurance
DOE U.S. Department of Energy MEMS microelectricomechanical system QA/QC quality assurance/quality control
DOT U.S. Department of Transportation mmBtu/hr millions British thermal units QAPP quality assurance performance plan
DE destruction efficiency per hour RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
DRE destruction or removal efficiency MMTCO2e million metric tons carbon RFS Renewable Fuel Standard
ECOS Environmental Council of the States dioxide equivalent RGGI Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative
RIA regulatory impact analysis E. Rationale for Selecting the Reporting B. What are the costs of this proposed rule?
SAE Society of Automotive Engineers Year C. What are the economic impacts of the
SAR IPCC Second Assessment Report F. Rationale for Selecting the Frequency of proposed rule?
SBREFA Small Business Regulatory Reporting D. What are the impacts of the proposed
Enforcement Fairness Act G. Rationale for the Emissions Information rule on small entities?
SF6 sulfur hexafluoride to Report E. What are the benefits of the proposed
SFTP Supplemental Federal Test Procedure H. Rationale for Monitoring Requirements rule for society?
SI international system of units I. Rationale for Selecting the IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
SIP State Implementation Plan Recordkeeping Requirements A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
SSM startup, shutdown, and malfunction J. Rationale for Verification Requirements Planning and Review
TCR The Climate Registry K. Rationale for Selection of Duration of B. Paperwork Reduction Act
TOC total organic carbon the Program C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
TRI Toxic Release Inventory V. Rationale for the Reporting, D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
TSCA Toxics Substances Control Act Recordkeeping and Verification (UMRA)
TSD technical support document Requirements for Specific Source E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
U.S. United States Categories F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
UIC underground injection control A. Overview of Reporting for Specific and Coordination With Indian Tribal
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of Source Categories Governments
1995 B. Electricity Purchases G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
UNFCCC United Nations Framework C. General Stationary Fuel Combustion Children From Environmental Health
Convention on Climate Change Sources Risks and Safety Risks
USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture D. Electricity Generation H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
USGS U.S. Geological Survey E. Adipic Acid Production Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
VMT vehicle miles traveled F. Aluminum Production Distribution, or Use
VOC volatile organic compound(s) G. Ammonia Manufacturing I. National Technology Transfer and
WBCSD World Business Council for H. Cement Production Advancement Act
Sustainable Development I. Electronics Manufacturing J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions
WCI Western Climate Initiative J. Ethanol Production To Address Environmental Justice in
WRI World Resources Institute K. Ferroalloy Production Minority Populations and Low-Income
XML eXtensible Markup Language L. Fluorinated GHG Production Populations
M. Food Processing I. Background
Table of Contents N. Glass Production
O. HCFC–22 Production and HFC–23 The proposed rule would require
I. Background
Destruction reporting of annual emissions of carbon
A. What Are GHGs?
B. What Is Climate Change?
P. Hydrogen Production dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous
C. Statutory Authority Q. Iron and Steel Production oxide (N2O), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6),
D. Inventory of U.S. GHG Emissions and R. Lead Production hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs),
Sinks S. Lime Manufacturing perfluorochemicals (PFCs), and other
E. How does this proposal relate to U.S. T. Magnesium Production
U. Miscellaneous Uses of Carbonates
fluorinated gases (e.g., nitrogen
government and other climate change trifluoride and hydrofluorinated ethers
efforts? V. Nitric Acid Production
W. Oil and Natural Gas Systems (HFEs)). The proposed rule would apply
F. How does this proposal relate to EPA’s
X. Petrochemical Production to certain downstream facilities that
Climate Change ANPR?
G. How was this proposed rule developed? Y. Petroleum Refineries emit GHGs (primarily large facilities
II. Summary of Existing Federal, State, and Z. Phosphoric Acid Production emitting 25,000 tpy of CO2 equivalent
Regional Emission Reporting Programs AA. Pulp and Paper Manufacturing GHG emissions or more) and to
A. Federal Voluntary GHG Programs BB. Silicon Carbide Production upstream suppliers of fossil fuels and
B. Federal Mandatory Reporting Programs CC. Soda Ash Manufacturing industrial GHGs, as well as to
C. EPA Emissions Inventories DD. Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) from
Electrical Equipment
manufacturers of vehicles and engines.
D. Regional and State Voluntary Programs Reporting would be at the facility level,
for GHG Emissions Reporting EE. Titanium Dioxide Production
FF. Underground Coal Mines except certain suppliers and vehicle and
E. State and Regional Mandatory Programs
for GHG Emissions Reporting and GG. Zinc Production engine manufacturers would report at
Reduction HH. Landfills the corporate level.
F. How the Proposed Mandatory GHG II. Wastewater Treatment This preamble is broken into several
Reporting Program is Different From the JJ. Manure Management large sections, as detailed above in the
Federal and State Programs EPA KK. Suppliers of Coal Table of Contents. Throughout the
Reviewed LL. Suppliers of Coal-Based Liquid Fuels preamble we explicitly request
III. Summary of the General Requirements of MM. Suppliers of Petroleum Products comment on a variety of issues. The
the Proposed Rule NN. Suppliers of Natural Gas and Natural
Gas Liquids
paragraph below describes the layout of
A. Who must report?
OO. Suppliers of Industrial GHGs the preamble and provides a brief
B. Schedule for Reporting
C. What do I have to report? PP. Suppliers of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) summary of each section. We also
D. How do I submit the report? QQ. Mobile Sources highlight particular issues on which, as
E. What records must I retain? VI. Collection, Management, and indicated later in the preamble, we
IV. Rationale for the General Reporting, Dissemination of GHG Emissions Data would specifically be interested in
Recordkeeping and Verification A. Purpose receiving comments.
Requirements That Apply to All Source B. Data Collection The first section of this preamble
Categories C. Data Management contains the basic background
A. Rationale for Selection of GHGs To D. Data Dissemination information about greenhouse gases and
Report VII. Compliance and Enforcement
B. Rationale for Selection of Source A. Compliance Assistance
climate change. It also describes the
Categories To Report B. Role of the States origin of this proposal, our legal
C. Rationale for Selection of Thresholds C. Enforcement authority and how this proposal relates
D. Rationale for Selection of Level of VIII. Economic Impacts of the Proposed Rule to other efforts to address emissions of
Reporting A. How are compliance costs estimated? greenhouse gases. In this section we
would be particularly interested in A. What Are GHGs? the Inventory is provided in Section I.D
receiving comment on the relationship The proposed rule would cover the below.
between this proposal and other major GHGs that are directly emitted by Because GHGs have different heat
government efforts. human activities. These include CO2, trapping capacities, they are not directly
The second section of this preamble CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, SF6, and other comparable without translating them
describes existing Federal, State, specified fluorinated compounds (e.g., into common units. The GWP, a metric
Regional mandatory and voluntary GHG HFEs) used in boutique applications that incorporates both the heat-trapping
reporting programs and how they are such as electronics and anesthetics. ability and atmospheric lifetime of each
similar and different to this proposal. These gases influence the climate GHG, can be used to develop
Again, similar to the previous section, system by trapping in the atmosphere comparable numbers by adjusting all
we would like comments on the heat that would otherwise escape to GHGs relative to the GWP of CO2. When
interrelationship of this proposal and space. The GHGs vary in their capacity quantities of the different GHGs are
existing GHG reporting programs. to trap heat. The GHGs also vary in multiplied by their GWPs, the different
The third section of this preamble GHGs can be compared on a CO2e basis.
terms of how long they remain in the
provides an overview of the proposal The GWP of CO2 is 1.0, and the GWP
atmosphere after being emitted, with the
itself, while the fourth section provides of other GHGs are expressed relative to
shortest-lived GHG remaining in the
the rationale for each decision the CO2. For example, CH4 has a GWP of 21,
atmosphere for roughly a decade and
Agency made in developing the meaning each metric ton of CH4
the longest-lived GHG remaining for up
proposal, including key design elements emissions would have 21 times as much
to 50,000 years. Because of these long
such as: (i) Source categories included, impact on global warming (over a 100-
atmospheric lifetimes, all of the major
(ii) the level of reporting, (iii) year time horizon) as a metric ton of
GHGs become well mixed throughout
applicability thresholds, (iv) reporting CO2 emissions. The GWPs of the other
the global atmosphere regardless of
and monitoring methods, (v) gases are listed in the proposed rule,
emission origin.
verification, (vi) frequency and (vii) Global atmospheric CO2 concentration and range from the hundreds up to
duration of reporting. Furthermore, in 23,900 for SF6.3 Aggregating all GHGs
increased about 35 percent from the pre-
this section, EPA explains the on a CO2e basis at the source level
industrial era to 2005. The global
distinction between upstream and allows a comparison of the total
atmospheric concentration of CH4 has
downstream reporters, describes why it emissions of all the gases from one
increased by 148 percent from pre-
is necessary to collect data at multiple source with emissions from other
industrial levels, and the N2O
points, and provides information on sources.
concentration has increased 18 percent.
how different data would be useful to For additional information about
The observed increase in concentration
inform different policies. As stated in GHGs, climate change, climate science,
of these gases can be attributed
the fourth section, we solicit comment etc. please see EPA’s climate change
primarily to human activities. The
on each design element of the proposal Web site found at http://www.epa.gov/
generally. atmospheric concentration of industrial climatechange/.
The fifth section of this preamble fluorinated gases—HFCs, PFCs, SF6—
looks at the same key design elements and other fluorinated compounds are B. What Is Climate Change?
for each of the source categories covered relatively low but are increasing rapidly; Climate change refers to any
by the proposal. Thus, for example, these gases are entirely anthropogenic in significant changes in measures of
there is a specific discussion regarding origin. climate (such as temperature,
appropriate applicability thresholds, Due to sheer quantity of emissions, precipitation, or wind) lasting for an
reporting and monitoring methodologies CO2 is the largest contributor to GHG extended period. Historically, natural
and reporting and recordkeeping concentrations followed by CH4. factors such as volcanic eruptions and
requirements for each source category. Combustion of fossil fuels (e.g., coal, oil, changes in the amount of energy
Each source category describes the gas) is the largest source of CO2 released from the sun have affected the
proposed options for each design emissions in the U.S. The other GHGs earth’s climate. Beginning in the late
element, as well as the other options are emitted from a variety of activities. 18th century, human activities
considered. In addition to the general These emissions are compiled by EPA associated with the industrial revolution
solicitation for comment on each design in the Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas
element generally and for each source Emissions and Sinks (Inventory) and UNFCCC Parties, and uses internationally accepted
category, throughout the fifth section reported to the UNFCCC 1 on an annual methods for its emission estimates.
3 EPA has chosen to use GWPs published in the
there are specific issues highlighted on basis.2 A more detailed discussion of
IPCC SAR (furthermore referenced as ‘‘SAR GWP
which we solicit comment. Please refer 1 For more information about the UNFCCC, please
values’’). The use of the SAR GWP values allows
to the specific source category of comparability of data collected in this proposed
refer to: http://www.unfccc.int. See Articles 4 and rule to the national GHG inventory that EPA
interest for more details. 12 of the UNFCCC treaty. Parties to the Convention, compiles annually to meet U.S. commitments to the
The sixth section of this preamble by ratifying, ‘‘shall develop, periodically update, UNFCCC. To comply with international reporting
explains how EPA would collect, publish and make available * * * national standards under the UNFCCC, official emission
inventories of anthropogenic emissions by sources
manage and disseminate the data, while and removals by sinks of all greenhouse gases not
estimates are to be reported by the U.S. and other
countries using SAR GWP values. The UNFCCC
the seventh section describes the controlled by the Montreal Protocol, using reporting guidelines for national inventories were
approach to compliance and comparable methodologies * * *’’. updated in 2002 but continue to require the use of
enforcement. In both sections the role of 2 The U.S. submits the Inventory of U.S.
GWPs from the SAR. The parties to the UNFCCC
the States is discussed, as are requests Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks to the have also agreed to use GWPs based upon a 100-
Secretariat of the UNFCCC as an annual reporting year time horizon although other time horizon
for comment on that role. requirement. The UNFCCC treaty, ratified by the values are available. For those fluorinated
Finally, the eighth section provides U.S. in 1992, sets an overall framework for compounds included in this proposal that not listed
the summary of the impacts and costs intergovernmental efforts to tackle the challenge in the SAR, EPA is using the most recent available
from the Regulatory Impact Analysis posed by climate change. The U.S. has submitted GWPs, either the IPCC Third Assessment Report or
the GHG inventory to the United Nations every year Fourth Assessment Report. For more specific
and the last section walks through the since 1993. The annual Inventory of U.S. information about the GWP of specific GHGs, please
various statutory and executive order Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks is consistent see Table A–1 in the proposed 40 CFR part 98,
requirements applicable to rulemakings. with national inventory data submitted by other subpart A.
have also changed the composition of C. Statutory Authority reasonably require. This information
the earth’s atmosphere and very likely On December 26, 2007, President may be required of any person who (i)
are influencing the earth’s climate.4 The Bush signed the FY2008 Consolidated owns or operates an emission source,
heating effect caused by the buildup of Appropriations Act which authorized (ii) manufactures control or process
GHGs in our atmosphere enhances the funding for EPA to ‘‘develop and equipment, (iii) the Administrator
Earth’s natural greenhouse effect and publish a draft rule not later than 9 believes may have information
adds to global warming. As global months after the date of enactment of necessary for the purposes set forth in
temperatures increase other elements of this Act, and a final rule not later than this section, or (iv) is subject to any
the climate system, such as 18 months after the date of enactment of requirement of the Act (except for
precipitation, snow and ice cover, sea this Act, to require mandatory reporting manufacturers subject to certain title II
levels, and weather events, change. The requirements). The information may be
of GHG emissions above appropriate
term ‘‘climate change,’’ which required for the purposes of developing
thresholds in all sectors of the economy
an implementation plan, an emission
encompasses these broader effects, is of the United States.’’ Consolidated
standard under sections 111, 112 or 129,
often used instead of ‘‘global warming.’’ Appropriations Act, 2008, Public Law
determining if any person is in violation
According to the IPCC, warming of 110–161, 121 Stat 1844, 2128 (2008).
of any standard or requirement of an
the climate system is ‘‘unequivocal,’’ as The accompanying joint explanatory
implementation plan or emissions
statement directed EPA to ‘‘use its
is now evident from observations of standard, or ‘‘carrying out any
existing authority under the Clean Air
increases in global average air and ocean provision’’ of the Act (except for a
Act’’ to develop a mandatory GHG
temperatures, widespread melting of provision of title II with respect to
reporting rule. ‘‘The Agency is further
snow and ice, and rising global average manufacturers of new motor vehicles or
directed to include in its rule reporting
sea level. Global mean surface new motor vehicle engines).5 Section
of emissions resulting from upstream
temperatures have risen by 0.74 °C (1.3 production and downstream sources, to
208 of the CAA provides EPA with
°F) over the last 100 years. Global mean the extent that the Administrator deems
similar broad authority regarding the
surface temperature was higher during manufacturers of new motor vehicles or
it appropriate.’’ EPA has interpreted that
the last few decades of the 20th century new motor vehicle engines, and other
language to confirm that it may be persons subject to the requirements of
than during any comparable period appropriate for the Agency to exercise
during the preceding four centuries. parts A and C of title II.
its CAA authority to require reporting of The scope of the persons potentially
U.S. temperatures also warmed during the quantity of fuel or chemical that is subject to a section 114(a)(1)
the 20th and into the 21st century; produced or imported from upstream information request (e.g., a person ‘‘who
temperatures are now approximately sources such as fuel suppliers, as well the Administrator believes may have
0.56 °C (1.0 °F) warmer than at the start as reporting of emissions from facilities information necessary for the purposes
of the 20th century, with an increased (downstream sources) that directly emit set forth in’’ section 114(a)) and the
rate of warming over the past 30 years. GHGs from their processes or from fuel reach of the phrase ‘‘carrying out any
Most of the observed increase in global combustion, as appropriate. The joint provision’’ of the Act are quite broad.
average temperatures since the mid-20th explanatory statement further states that EPA’s authority to request information
century is very likely due to the ‘‘[t]he Administrator shall determine reaches to a source not subject to the
observed increase in anthropogenic appropriate thresholds of emissions CAA, and may be used for purposes
GHG concentrations. above which reporting is required, and relevant to any provision of the Act.
According to different scenarios how frequently reports shall be Thus, for example, utilizing sections
submitted to EPA. The Administrator 114 and 208, EPA could gather
assessed by the IPCC, average global
shall have discretion to use existing information relevant to carrying out
temperature by end of this century is
reporting requirements for electric provisions involving research (e.g.,
projected to increase by 1.8 to 4.0 °C
generating units’’ under section 821 of section 103(g)); evaluating and setting
(3.2 to 7.2 °F) compared to the average
the 1990 CAA Amendments. standards (e.g., section 111); and
temperature in 1990. The uncertainty EPA is proposing this rule under its
range of this estimate is 1.1 to 6.4 °C (2.0 endangerment determinations contained
existing CAA authority. EPA also in specific provisions of the Act (e.g.,
to 11.5 °F). Future projections show proposes that the rule require the
that, for most scenarios assuming no 202); as well as other programs.
reporting of the GHG emissions Given the broad scope of sections 114
additional GHG emission reduction resulting from the quantity of fossil fuel and 208 of the CAA, it is appropriate for
policies, atmospheric concentrations of or industrial gas that is produced or EPA to gather the information required
GHGs are expected to continue climbing imported from upstream sources such as by this rule because such information is
for most if not all of the remainder of fuel suppliers, as well as reporting of relevant to EPA’s carrying out a wide
this century, with associated increases GHG emissions from facilities variety of CAA provisions. For example,
in average temperature. Overall risk to (downstream sources) that directly emit emissions from direct emitters should
human health, society and the GHGs from their processes or from fuel inform decisions about whether and
environment increases with increases in combustion, as appropriate. This how to use section 111 to establish
both the rate and magnitude of climate proposed rule would also establish NSPS for various source categories
change. appropriate thresholds and frequency emitting GHGs, including whether there
For additional information about for reporting. are any additional categories of sources
GHGs, climate change, climate science, Section 114(a)(1) of the CAA that should be listed under section
etc. please see EPA’s climate change authorizes the Administrator to, inter 111(b). Similarly, the information
Web site found at http://www.epa.gov/ alia, require certain persons (see below) required of manufacturers of mobile
climatechange/. on a one-time, periodic or continuous
basis to keep records, make reports, 5 Although there are exclusions in section
undertake monitoring, sample 114(a)(1) regarding certain title II requirements

4 IPCCC: Climate Change 2007: The Physical applicable to manufacturers of new motor vehicle
Science Basis, February 2, 2007 (http:// emissions, or provide such other and motor vehicle engines, section 208 authorizes
www.ipcc.ch/). information as the Administrator may the gathering of information related to those areas.
sources should support decisions submitted by other UNFCCC Parties, industrial sources would improve the
regarding treatment of those sources and uses internationally accepted accuracy of the Inventory by confirming
under sections 202, 213 or 231 of the methods for its emission estimates. the national statistics and emission
CAA. In addition, the information from In preparing the annual Inventory, estimation methodologies used to
fuel suppliers would be relevant in EPA leads an interagency team that develop the top-down inventory. The
analyzing whether to proceed, and includes DOE, USDA, DOT, DOD, the results can indicate shortcomings in the
particular options for how to proceed, State Department, and others. EPA national statistics and identify where
under section 211(c) regarding fuels, or collaborates with hundreds of experts adjustments may be needed.
to inform action concerning representing more than a dozen Federal Therefore, although the data collected
downstream sources under a variety of agencies, academic institutions, under this rule would not replace the
Title I or Title II provisions. For industry associations, consultants, and system in place to produce the
example, the geographic distribution, environmental organizations. The comprehensive annual national
production volumes and characteristics Inventory is peer-reviewed annually by Inventory, it can serve as a useful tool
of various fuel types and subtypes may domestic experts, undergoes a 30-day to better improve the accuracy of future
also prove useful is setting NSPS or Best public comment period, and is also national-level inventories.
Available Control Technology limits for peer-reviewed annually by UNFCCC At the same time, EPA solicits
some combustion sources. review teams. comment on whether the submission of
Transportation distances from fuel The most recent GHG inventory the Inventory to the UNFCCC could be
sources to end users may be useful in submitted to the UNFCCC, the Inventory utilized to satisfy the requirements of
evaluating cost effectiveness of various of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and the rule promulgated by EPA pursuant
fuel choices, increases in transportation Sinks: 1990–2006 (April 2008), to the FY2008 Consolidated
emissions that may be associated with estimated that total U.S. GHG emissions Appropriations Act.
various fuel choices, as well as the were 7,054.2 million metric tons of For more information about the
overall impact on energy usage and CO2e in 2006. Overall emissions have Inventory, please refer to the following
availability. The data overall also would grown by 15 percent from 1990 to 2006. Web site: http://www.epa.gov/
inform EPA’s implementation of section CO2 emissions have increased by 18 climatechange/emissions/
103(g) of the CAA regarding percent since 1990. CH4 emissions have usinventoryreport.html.
improvements in nonregulatory decreased by 8 percent since 1990, E. How does this proposal relate to U.S.
strategies and technologies for while N2O emissions have decreased by government and other climate change
preventing or reducing air pollutants. 4 percent since 1990. Emissions of efforts?
This section, which specifically HFCs, PFCs, and SF6 have increased by
mentions CO2, highlights energy 64 percent since 1990. The combustion The proposed mandatory GHG
conservation, end-use efficiency and of fossil fuels (i.e., petroleum, coal, and reporting program would provide EPA,
fuel-switching as possible strategies for natural gas) was the largest source of other government agencies, and outside
consideration and the type of GHG emissions in the U.S., and stakeholders with economy-wide data
information collected under this rule accounted for approximately 80 percent on facility-level (and in some cases
would be relevant. The above of total CO2e emissions. corporate-level) GHG emissions.
discussion is not a comprehensive The Inventory is a comprehensive Accurate and timely information on
listing of all the possible ways the top-down national assessment of GHG emissions is essential for
information collected under this rule national GHG emissions, and it uses informing some future climate change
could assist EPA in carrying out any top-down national energy data and policy decisions. Although additional
provision of the CAA. Rather it other national statistics (e.g., on data collection (e.g., for other source
illustrates how the information request agriculture). To achieve the goal of categories such as indirect emissions or
fits within the parameters of EPA’s CAA comprehensive national emissions offsets) may be required as the
authority. coverage for reporting under the development of climate policies
UNFCCC, most GHG emissions in the evolves, the data collected in this rule
D. Inventory of U.S. GHG Emissions and report are calculated via activity data would provide useful information for a
Sinks from national-level databases, statistics, variety of policies. For example, through
The Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas and surveys. The use of the aggregated data collected under this rule, EPA
Emissions and Sinks (Inventory), national data means that the national would gain a better understanding of the
prepared by EPA’s Office of emissions estimates are not broken- relative emissions of specific industries,
Atmospheric Programs in coordination down at the geographic or facility level. and the distribution of emissions from
with the Office of Transportation and In contrast, this reporting rule focuses individual facilities within those
Air Quality, is an impartial, policy- on bottom-up data and individual industries. The facility-specific data
neutral report that tracks annual GHG sources above appropriate thresholds. would also improve our understanding
emissions. The annual report presents Although it would provide more of the factors that influence GHG
historical U.S. emissions of CO2, CH4, specific data, it would not provide full emission rates and actions that facilities
N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6. coverage of total annual U.S. GHG are already taking to reduce emissions.
The U.S. submits the Inventory to the emissions, as is required in the In addition, the data collected on some
Secretariat of the UNFCCC as an annual development of the Inventory in source categories such as landfills and
reporting requirement. The UNFCCC reporting to the UNFCCC. manure management, which can be
treaty, ratified by the U.S. in 1992, sets The mandatory GHG reporting rule covered by the CAA, could also
an overall framework for would help to improve the development potentially help inform offset program
intergovernmental efforts to tackle the of future national inventories for design by providing fundamental data
challenge posed by climate change. The particular source categories or sectors by on current baseline emissions for these
U.S. has submitted the GHG inventory advancing the understanding of categories.
to the United Nations every year since emission processes and monitoring Through this rulemaking, EPA would
1993. The annual Inventory is methodologies. Facility, unit, and be able to track the trend of emissions
consistent with national inventory data process level GHG emissions data for from industries and facilities within
industries over time, particularly in the specific intent of reporting of G. How was this proposed rule
response to policies and potential emission reductions, as is the 1605(b) developed?
regulations. The data collected by this program.
rule would also improve the U.S. In response to the FY2008
Again, in Section II, existing State and Consolidated Appropriations
government’s ability to formulate a set
Regional GHG reporting and reduction Amendment, EPA has developed this
of climate change policy options and to
programs are summarized. Many of proposed rulemaking. The components
assess which industries would be
affected, and how these industries those programs may be broader in scope of this development are explained in the
would be affected by the options. and more aggressive in implementation. following subsections.
Finally, EPA’s experience with other States collecting that additional
1. Identifying the Goals of the GHG
reporting programs is that such information may have determined that Reporting System
programs raise awareness of emissions types of data not collected by this
among reporters and other stakeholders, proposal are necessary to implement a The mandatory reporting program
and thus contribute to efforts to identify variety of climate efforts. While EPA’s would provide comprehensive and
reduction opportunities and carry them proposal was specifically developed in accurate data which would inform
out. response to the Appropriations Act, we future climate change policies. Potential
The goal is to have this GHG reporting also acknowledge, similar to the States, future climate policies include research
program supplement and complement, there may be a need to collect additional and development initiatives, economic
rather than duplicate, U.S. government data from sources subject to this rule as incentives, new or expanded voluntary
and other GHG programs (e.g., State and well as other sources depending on the programs, adaptation strategies,
Regional based programs). As discussed types of policies the Agency is emission standards, a carbon tax, or a
in Section I.D of this preamble, EPA developing and implementing (e.g., cap-and-trade program. Because we do
anticipates that facility-level GHG indirect emissions and offsets). not know at this time the specific
emissions data would lead to policies that may be adopted, the data
Addressing climate change may require
improvements in the quality of the reported through the mandatory
a suite of policies and programs and this
Inventory. reporting system should be of sufficient
As discussed in Section II of this proposal for a mandatory reporting quality to support a range of
preamble, a number of EPA voluntary program is just one effort to collect approaches. Also, consistent with the
partnership programs include a GHG information necessary to inform those Appropriations Act, the reporting rule
emissions and/or reductions reporting policies. There may well be subsequent proposes to cover a broad range of
component (e.g., Climate Leaders, the efforts depending on future policy sectors of the economy.
Natural Gas STAR program). Because direction and/or requests from Congress. To these ends, we identified the
this mandatory reporting program following goals of the mandatory
F. How does this proposal relate to
would have much broader coverage than reporting system:
EPA’s Climate Change ANPR?
the voluntary programs, it would help
• Obtain data that is of sufficient
EPA learn more about emissions from On July 30, 2008, EPA published an
facilities not currently included in these quality that it can be used to support a
ANPR on ‘‘Regulating Greenhouse Gas range of future climate change policies
programs and broaden coverage of these Emissions under the Clean Air Act’’ (73
industries. and regulations.
FR 44354). The ANPR presented • Balance the rule coverage to
Also discussed in Section II of this
preamble, DOE EIA implements a information relevant to, and solicited maximize the amount of emissions
voluntary GHG registry under section public comment on, issues regarding the reported while excluding small emitters.
1605(b) of the Energy Policy Act. Under potential regulation of GHGs under the • Create reporting requirements that
EIA’s ‘‘1605(b) program,’’ reporters can CAA, including EPA’s response to the are consistent with existing GHG
choose to prepare an entity-wide GHG U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in reporting programs by using existing
inventory and identify specific GHG Massachusetts v. EPA. 127 S.Ct. 1438 GHG emission estimation and reporting
reductions made by the entity.6 EPA’s (2007). EPA’s proposing the mandatory methodologies to reduce reporting
proposed mandatory GHG program GHG reporting rule does not indicate burden, where feasible.
would have a much broader set of that EPA has made any final decisions
reporters included, primarily at the related to the questions identified in the 2. Developing the Proposed Rule
facility 7 rather than entity-level, but ANPR. Any information collected under In order to ensure a comprehensive
this proposed rule is not designed with the mandatory GHG reporting program consideration of GHG emissions, EPA
would assist EPA and others in organized the development of the
6 Under the 1605(b) program an ‘‘entity’’ is
developing future climate policy.8 proposal around seven categories of
defined as ‘‘the whole or part of any business,
institution, organization or household that is processes that emit GHGs: Downstream
recognized as an entity under any U.S. Federal, 8 At this time, a regulation requiring the reporting sources of emissions: (1) Fossil Fuel
State or local law that applies to it; is located, at of GHG emissions and emissions-related data under Combustion: Stationary, (2) Fossil Fuel
least in part, in the U.S.; and whose operations CAA sections 114 and 208 does not trigger the need
affect U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.’’ (http://
Combustion: Mobile, (3) Industrial
for EPA to develop or revise regulations under any
www.pi.energy.gov/enhancingGHGregistry/) Processes, (4) Fossil Fuel Fugitive 9
other section of the CAA, including the PSD
7 For the purposes of this proposal, facility means
program. See memorandum entitled ‘‘EPA’s Emissions, (5) Biological Processes and
any physical property, plant, building, structure, Interpretation of Regulations that Determine Upstream sources of emissions: (6) Fuel
source, or stationary equipment located on one or
Pollutants Covered By Federal Prevention of
more contiguous or adjacent properties in actual
Significant Deterioration (PSD) Permit Program’’ 9 The term ‘‘fugitive’’ often refers to emissions
physical contact or separated solely by a public
roadway or other public right-of-way and under (Dec. 18, 2008). EPA is reconsidering this that cannot reasonably pass through a stack,
common ownership or common control, that emits memorandum and will be seeking public comment chimney, vent or other functionally equivalent
or may emit any greenhouse gas. Operators of on the issues raised in it. That proceeding, not this opening. This definition of fugitives is used
military installations may classify such installations rulemaking, would be the appropriate venue for throughout the preamble, except in Section W Oil
as more than a single facility based on distinct and submitting comments on the issue of whether and Natural Gas Systems, which uses a slightly
independent functional groupings within monitoring regulations under the CAA should modified definition based on the Intergovernmental
contiguous military properties. trigger the PSD program. Panel on Climate Change.
Suppliers, and (7) Industrial GHG may be found in the docket at EPA–HQ– reporting programs. In addition to the
Suppliers. OAR–2008–0508–054. Section II of this GHG programs, other Federal emission
For each category, EPA evaluated the preamble summarizes the fundamental reporting programs and emission
requirements of existing GHG reporting elements of these programs. inventories are relevant to the proposed
programs, obtained input from GHG reporting rule. Several of these
stakeholders, analyzed reporting 4. Stakeholder Outreach To Identify
programs are summarized in this
options, and developed the general Reporting Issues
section.
reporting requirements and specific Early in the development process, we In developing the proposed rule, we
requirements for each of the GHG conducted a proactive communications carefully reviewed the existing reporting
emitting processes. outreach program to inform the public programs, particularly with respect to
about the rule development effort. We emissions sources covered, thresholds,
3. Evaluation of Existing GHG Reporting
solicited input and maintained an open monitoring methods, frequency of
Programs
door policy for those interested in reporting and verification. States may
A number of State and regional GHG discussing the rulemaking. Since have, or intend to develop, reporting
reporting systems currently are in place January 2008, EPA staff held more than programs that are broader in scope or
or under development. EPA’s goal is to 100 meetings with over 250 are more aggressive in implementation
develop a reporting rule that, to the stakeholders. These stakeholders because those programs are either
extent possible and appropriate, would included: components of established reduction
rely on similar protocols and formats of • Trade associations and firms in programs (e.g., cap and trade) or being
the existing programs and, therefore, potentially affected industries/sectors; used to design and inform specific
reduce the burden of reporting for all • State, local, and Tribal complementary measures (e.g., energy
parties involved. Therefore, each of the environmental control agencies and efficiency). EPA has benefitted from the
work groups performed a regional air quality planning leadership the States have shown in
comprehensive review of existing organizations; developing these programs and their
voluntary and mandatory GHG reporting • State and regional organizations experiences. Discussions with States
programs, as well as guidance already involved in GHG emissions that have already implemented
documents for quantifying GHG reporting, such as TCR, CARB, and WCI; programs have been especially
emissions from specific sources. These • Environmental groups and other instructive. Where possible, we built
GHG reporting programs and guidance nongovernmental organizations. upon concepts in existing Federal and
documents included the following: • We also met with DOE and USDA State programs in developing the
• International programs, including which have programs relevant to GHG mandatory GHG reporting rule.
the IPCC, the EU Emissions Trading emissions.
System, and the Environment Canada During the meetings, we shared A. Federal Voluntary GHG Programs
reporting rule; information about the statutory EPA and other Federal agencies
• U.S. national programs, such as the requirements and timetable for operate a number of voluntary GHG
U.S. GHG inventory, the ARP, voluntary developing a rule. Stakeholders were reporting and reduction programs that
GHG partnership programs (e.g., Natural encouraged to provide input on key EPA reviewed when developing this
Gas STAR), and the DOE 1605(b) issues. Examples of topics discussed proposal, including Climate Leaders,
voluntary GHG registry; were, existing GHG monitoring and several Non-CO2 voluntary programs,
• State and regional GHG reporting reporting programs and lessons learned, the CHP partnership, the SmartWay
programs, such as TCR, RGGI, and thresholds for reporting, schedule for Transport Partnership program, the
programs in California, New Mexico, reporting, scope of reporting, handling National Environmental Performance
and New Jersey; of confidential data, data verification, Track Partnership, and the DOE 1605(b)
• Reporting protocols developed by and the role of States in administering voluntary GHG registry. There are
nongovernmental organizations, such as the program. As needed, the technical several other Federal voluntary
WRI/WBCSD; and work groups followed up with these programs to encourage emissions
• Programs from industrial trade stakeholder groups on a variety of reductions, clean energy, or energy
organizations, such as the American methodological, technical, and policy efficiency, and this summary does not
Petroleum Institute’s Compendium of issues. EPA staff also provided cover them all. This summary focuses
GHG Estimation Methodologies for the information to Tribes through on programs that include voluntary
Oil and Gas Industry and the Cement conference calls with different Indian GHG emission inventories or reporting
Sustainability Initiative’s CO2 working groups and organizations at of GHG emission reduction activities for
Accounting and Reporting Standard for EPA and through individual calls with sectors covered by this proposed
the Cement Industry, developed by Tribal board members of TCR. rulemaking.
WBCSD. For a full list of organizations EPA Climate Leaders.10 Climate Leaders is
In reviewing these programs, we met with during development of this an EPA partnership program that works
analyzed the sectors covered, thresholds proposal, see the memo found at EPA– with companies to develop GHG
for reporting, approach to indirect HQ–OAR–2008–0508–055. reduction strategies. Over 250 industry
emissions reporting, the monitoring or
II. Summary of Existing Federal, State, partners in a wide range of sectors have
emission estimating methods used, the
and Regional Emission Reporting joined. Partner companies complete a
measures to assure the quality of the
Programs corporate-wide inventory of GHG
reported data, the point of monitoring,
emissions and develop an inventory
data input needs, and information A number of voluntary and
management plan using Climate Leaders
required to be reported and/or retained. mandatory GHG programs already exist
protocols. Each company sets GHG
We analyzed these provisions for or are being developed at the State,
reductions goals and submits to EPA an
suitability to a mandatory, Federal GHG Regional, and Federal levels. These
reporting program, and compiled the programs have different scopes and 10 For more information about the Climate
information. The full review of existing purposes. Many focus on GHG emission Leaders program please see: http://www.epa.gov/
GHG reporting programs and guidance reduction, whereas others are purely climateleaders/.
annual GHG emissions inventory CHP Partnership.12 The CHP 1605(b) Voluntary Registry.15 The
documenting their progress. The annual Partnership is an EPA partnership that DOE EIA established a voluntary GHG
reporting form provides corporate-wide cuts across sectors. It encourages use of registry under section 1605(b) of the
emissions by type of emissions source. CHP technologies to generate electricity Energy Policy Act of 1992. The program
and heat from the same fuel source, was recently enhanced and a final rule
Non-CO2 Voluntary Partnership
thereby increasing energy efficiency and containing general reporting guidelines
Programs.11 Since the 1990s, EPA has
reducing GHG emissions from fuel was published on April 21, 2006 (71 FR
operated a number of non-CO2 20784). The rule is contained in 10 CFR
combustion. Corporate and institutional
voluntary partnership programs aimed partners provide data on existing and part 300. Unlike EPA’s proposal which
at reducing emissions from GHGs such new CHP projects, but do not submit requires of reporting of GHG emissions
as CH4, SF66, and PFCs. There are four emissions inventories. from facilities over a specific threshold,
sector-specific voluntary CH4 reduction SmartWay Transport Partnership.13 the DOE 1605(b) registry allows anyone
programs: Natural Gas STAR, Landfill The SmartWay Transport Partnership (e.g., a public entity, private company,
Methane Outreach Program, Coalbed program is a voluntary partnership or an individual) to report on their
Methane Outreach Program and between freight industry stakeholders emissions and their emission reduction
AgSTAR. In addition, there are sector- and EPA to promote fuel efficiency projects to the registry. Large emitters
specific voluntary emission reduction improvements and GHG emissions (e.g., anyone that emits over 10,000 tons
partnerships for high GWP gases. The reductions. Over 900 companies have of CO2e per year) that wish to register
Natural Gas STAR partnership joined including freight carriers emissions reductions must submit
encourages companies across the (railroads and trucking fleets) and annual company-wide GHG emissions
natural gas and oil industries to adopt shipping companies. Carrier and inventories following technical
practices that reduce CH4 emissions. shipping companies commit to guidelines published by DOE and must
The Landfill Methane Outreach Program measuring and improving the efficiency calculate and report net GHG emissions
and Coalbed Methane Outreach Program of their freight operations using EPA- reductions. The program offers a range
encourage voluntary capture and use of developed tools that quantify the of reporting methodologies from
landfill and coal mine CH4, respectively, benefits of a number of fuel-saving stringent direct measurement to
to generate electricity or other useful strategies. Companies report progress simplified calculations using default
energy. These partnerships focus on annually. The GHG data that carrier factors and allows the reporters to report
companies report to EPA is discussed using the methodological option they
achieving CH4 reductions. Industry
further in Section V.QQ.4b of this choose. In addition, as mentioned
partners voluntarily provide technical
preamble. above, unlike EPA’s proposal,
information on projects they undertake
National Environmental Performance sequestration and offset projects can
to reduce CH4 emissions on an annual
Track Partnership.14 The Performance also be reported under the 1605(b)
basis, but they do not submit CH4 program. There is additional flexibility
emissions inventories. AgSTAR Track Partnership is a voluntary
partnership that recognizes and rewards offered to small sources who can choose
encourages beneficial use of agricultural to limit annual inventories and emission
CH4 but does not have partner reporting private and public facilities that
demonstrate strong environmental reduction reports to just a single type of
requirements. activity rather than reporting company-
performance beyond current
There are two sector specific requirements. Performance Track is wide GHG emissions, but must still
partnerships to reduce SF6 emissions: designed to augment the existing follow the technical guidelines.
The SF6 Emission Reduction regulatory system by creating incentives Reported data are made available on the
Partnership for Electric Power Systems, for facilities to achieve environmental Web in a public use database.
with over 80 participating utilities, and results beyond those required by law. Summary. These voluntary programs
an SF6 Emission Reduction Partnership To qualify, applicants must have are different in nature from the
for the Magnesium Industry. Partners in implemented an independently- proposed mandatory GHG emissions
these programs implement practices to assessed environmental management reporting rule. Industry participation in
reduce SF6 emissions and prepare system, have a record of sustained the programs and reporting to the
corporate-wide annual inventories of compliance with environmental laws programs is entirely voluntary. A small
SF6 emissions using protocols and and regulations, commit to achieving number of sources report, compared to
reporting tools developed by EPA. There measurable environmental results that the number of facilities that would
go beyond compliance, and provide likely be affected by the proposed
are also two partnerships focused on
information to the local community on mandatory GHG reporting rule. Most of
PFCs. The Voluntary Aluminum
their environmental activities. Members the EPA voluntary programs do not
Industrial Partnership promotes
are subject to the same legal require reporting of annual emissions
technically feasible and cost effective data, but are instead intended to
actions to reduce PFC emissions. requirements as other regulated
facilities. In some cases, EPA and states encourage GHG reduction projects/
Industry partners track and report PFC activities and track partner’s successes
emissions reductions. Similarly, the have reduced routine reporting or given
some flexibility to program members in in implementing such projects. For the
Semiconductor Industry Association programs that do include annual
and EPA formed a partnership to reduce how they meet regulatory requirements.
This approach is recognized by more emissions reporting (e.g., Climate
PFC emissions. A third party compiles Leaders, DOE 1605(b)) the scope and
data from participating semiconductor than 20 states that have adopted similar
performance-based leadership programs. level of detail are different. For
companies and submits an aggregate example, Climate Leaders annual
(not company-specific) annual PFC 12 For more information about the CHP reports are generally corporate-wide and
emissions report. Partnership please see: http://www.epa.gov/chp/. do not contain the facility and process-
13 For more information about SmartWay please
11 For more information about the Non-CO
2 see: http://www.epa.gov/smartway/. 15 For more information about DOE’s 1605(b)
Voluntary Partnership Programs please see: http:// 14 For more information about Performance Track programs please see: http://www.pi.energy.gov/
www.epa.gov/nonco2/voluntaryprograms.html. please see: http://www.epa.gov/perftrac/index.htm. enhancingGHGregistry/.
level details that would be needed by a data used to calculate CO2 emissions C. EPA Emissions Inventories
mandatory program to verify the must be reported. U.S. Inventory of Greenhouse Gas
accuracy of the emissions reports. The joint explanatory statement Emissions and Sinks. As discussed in
At the same time, aspects of the accompanying the FY2008 Consolidated Section I.D of this preamble, EPA
voluntary programs serve as useful Appropriations Amendment specified prepares the U.S. Inventory of
starting points for the mandatory GHG that EPA could use the existing Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks
reporting rules. GHG emission reporting requirements for electric every year. The details of this Inventory,
calculation principles and protocols generating units under section 821 of the methodologies used to calculate
have been developed for various types the 1990 CAA Amendments.18 As emissions and its relationship to this
of emission sources by Climate Leaders, described in Sections V.C. and V.D. of proposal are discussed in Section I.D of
the DOE 1605(b) program, and some this preamble, because the part 75 this preamble.
partnerships such as the SF6 reduction regulations already require reporting of NEI. 20 EPA compiles the NEI, a
partnerships and SmartWay. Under high quality CO2 data from EGUs, the database of air emissions information
these protocols, reporting companies GHG reporting rule proposes to use the provided primarily by State and local
monitor process or operating parameters same CO2 data rather than require air agencies and Tribes. The database
to estimate GHG emissions, report additional reporting of CO2 from EGUs. contains information on stationary and
annually, and retain records to They would, however, have to include mobile sources that emit criteria air
document their GHG estimates. Through reporting of the other GHG emissions, pollutants and their precursors, as well
the voluntary programs, EPA, DOE, and such as CH4 and N2O, at their facilities. as hazardous air pollutants. Stationary
participating companies have gained TRI. TRI requires facility-level point source emissions that must be
understanding of processes that emit reporting of annual mass emissions of inventoried and reported are those that
GHGs and experience in developing and approximately 650 toxic chemicals.19 If emit over a threshold amount of at least
reviewing GHG emission inventories. they are above established thresholds, one criteria pollutant. Many States also
B. Federal Mandatory Reporting facilities in a wide range of industries inventory and report stationary sources
Programs report including manufacturing that emit amounts below the thresholds
industries, metal and coal mining, for each pollutant. The NEI includes
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) and Nitrogen
electric utilities, and other industrial over 60,000 facilities. The information
Oxides (NOX) Trading Programs. The
sectors. Facilities must submit annual that is required consists of facility
ARP and the NOX Budget Trading
reports of total stack and fugitive identification information; process
Program are cap-and-trade programs
emissions of the listed toxic chemicals information detailing the types of air
designed to reduce emissions of SO2
using a standardized form which can be pollution emission sources; air
and NOX16. As a part of those programs
submitted electronically. No pollution emission estimates (including
facilities with EGUs that serve a
information is reported on the processes annual emissions); control devices in
generator larger than 25 MW are
and emissions points included in the place; stack parameters; and location
required to report emissions. The 40
total emissions. The data reported to information. The NEI differs from the
CFR part 75 CEMS rule establishes
TRI are not directly useful for the GHG proposed GHG reporting rule in that the
monitoring and reporting requirements
rule because TRI does not include GHG NEI contains no GHG data, and the data
under these programs. The regulations
emissions and does not identify are reported primarily by State agencies
in 40 CFR part 75 require continuous
processes or emissions sources. rather than directly reported by
monitoring and quarterly and annual
However, the TRI program is similar to industries.21 However, in developing
emissions reporting of CO2 mass
the proposed GHG reporting rule in that the proposed rule, EPA used the NEI to
emissions,17 SO2 mass emissions, NOX
it requires direct emissions reporting help determine sources that might need
emission rate, and heat input. Part 75
from a large number of facilities to report under the GHG reporting rule.
contains specifications for the types of
(roughly 23,000) across all major We considered the types of facility,
monitoring systems that may be used to
industrial sectors. Therefore, EPA process and activity data reported in
determine CO2 emissions and sets forth
reviewed the TRI program for ideas NEI to support the emissions data as a
operations, maintenance, and QA/QC
regarding program structure and possible model for the types of data to
requirement for each system. In some
implementation. be reported under the GHG reporting
cases, EGUs are allowed to use
Vehicle Reporting. EPA’s existing rule. We also considered systems that
simplified procedures other than CEMS
criteria pollutant emissions certification could be used to link data reported
(e.g., monitoring fuel feed rates and
regulations, as well as the fuel economy under the GHG rule with data for the
conducting periodic sampling and
testing regulations which EPA same facilities in the NEI.
analyses of fuel carbon content) to
determine CO2 emissions. Under the administers as part of the CAFE D. Regional and State Voluntary
regulations, affected EGUs must submit program, require vehicle manufacturers Programs for GHG Emissions Reporting
detailed quarterly and annual CO2 to measure and report CO2 for A number of States have
emissions reports using standardized essentially all of their light duty demonstrated leadership and developed
electronic reporting formats. If CEMS vehicles. In addition, many engine corporate voluntary GHG reporting
are used, the quarterly reports include manufacturers currently measure CO2 as programs individually or joined with
hourly CEMS data and other an integral part of calculating emissions other States to develop GHG reporting
information used to calculate emissions of criteria pollutants, and some report programs as part of their approaches to
(e.g., monitor downtime). If alternative CO2 emissions to EPA in some form. addressing GHG emissions. EPA has
monitoring programs are used, detailed
18 The joint explanatory statement refers to 20 For more information about the NEI please see:
16 For more information about these cap and trade ‘‘Section 821 of the Clean Air Act’’ but section 821 http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/.
programs see http://www.epa.gov/airmarkt/. was part of the 1990 CAA Amendments not 21 As discussed in section IV of the preamble,
17 The requirements regarding CO emissions
2 codified into the CAA itself. tropospheric ozone (O3) is a GHG. The precursors
reporting apply only to ARP sources and are 19 For more information about TRI and what to tropospheric O3 (e.g., NOX, VOCs, etc) are
pursuant to section 821 of the CAA Amendments chemicals are on the list, please see: http:// reported to the NEI by States and then EPA models
of 1990, Public Law 101–549. www.epa.gov/tri/. tropospheric O3 based on that precursor data.
benefitted from this leadership and the leadership and are developing or have categories and adding others over time.
States’ experiences; discussions with developed mandatory GHG reporting Points of regulation for some source
those that have already implemented programs and GHG emissions control categories, calculation methodologies,
programs have been especially programs. This section of the preamble and other reporting program elements
instructive. Section V of the preamble summarizes two regional cap-and-trade are under development. The WCI is also
describes the proposed methods for programs and several State mandatory analyzing alternative or complementary
each source category. The different reporting rules. We recognize that, like policies other than cap-and-trade that
options considered have been the current voluntary regional and State could help reach GHG reduction goals.
particularly informed by the States’ programs, State and regional mandatory Options for rule implementation and for
expertise. This section of the preamble reporting programs may evolve or coordination with other rules and
summarizes two prominent voluntary develop to include additional programs such as TCR are being
efforts. In developing the greenhouse monitoring and reporting requirements investigated.
rules, EPA reviewed the relevant than those included in the proposed A key difference between the Federal
protocols used by these programs as a rule. In fact, these programs may be mandatory GHG reporting rule and the
starting point. We recognize that these broader in scope or more aggressive in RGGI and WCI programs is that the
programs may have additional implementation because the programs Federal mandatory GHG rule is solely a
monitoring and reporting requirements are either components of established reporting requirement. It does not in any
than those outlined in the proposed rule reduction programs (e.g., cap and trade) way regulate GHG emissions or require
in order to provide distinct program or being used to design and inform any emissions reductions.
benefits. specific complementary measures (e.g., State Mandatory GHG Reporting
CCAR.22 CCAR is a voluntary GHG energy efficiency). Rules. Seventeen States have developed,
registry already in use in California. RGGI.24 RGGI is a regional cap-and- or are developing, mandatory GHG
CCAR has released several methodology trade program that covers CO2 emissions reporting rules.26 The docket contains a
documents including a general reporting from EGUs that serve a generator greater summary of these State mandatory rules
protocol, general certification than 25 MW in member States in the (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–056). Final
(verification) protocol, and several mid-Atlantic and Northeast. The rules have not yet been developed by
sector-specific protocols. Companies program goal is to reduce CO2 emissions some of the States, so details of some
submit emissions reports using a to 10 percent below 1990 levels by the programs are unknown. Reporting
standardized electronic system. year 2020. RGGI will utilize the CO2 requirements have taken effect in twelve
Emission reports may be aggregated at reported to and verified by EPA under States as of 2009; the rest start between
the company level or reported at the 40 CFR part 75 to determine compliance 2010 and 2012. Reporting is typically
facility level. of the EGUs in the cap-and-trade annual, although some States require
TCR.23 TCR is a partnership formed program. In addition, the EGUs in RGGI quarterly reporting for EGUs, consistent
by U.S. and Mexican States, Canadian that are not currently reporting to EPA with RGGI and the ARP.
provinces, and Tribes to develop under the ARP and NOX Budget State rules differ with regard to which
standard GHG emissions measurement program (e.g., co-generation facilities) facilities must report and which GHGs
and verification protocols and a will start reporting their CO2 data to must be reported. Some States require
reporting system capable of supporting EPA for QA/QC, similar to the sources all facilities that must obtain Title V
mandatory or voluntary GHG emission already reporting. Certain types of offset permits to report GHG emissions. Others
reporting rules and policies for its projects will be allowed, and GHG offset require reporting for particular sectors
member States. TCR has released a protocols have been developed. The (e.g., large EGUs, cement plants,
General Reporting Protocol that contains States participating in RGGI have refineries). Some State rules apply to
procedures to measure and calculate adopted State rules (based on the model any facility with stationary combustion
GHG emissions from a wide range of rule) to implement RGGI in each State. sources that emit a threshold level of
source categories. They have also The RGGI cap-and-trade program took CO2. Some apply to any facility, or to
released a general verification protocol, effect on January 1, 2009. facilities within listed industries, if their
and an electronic reporting system. WCI.25 WCI is another regional cap- emissions exceed a specified threshold
Founding reporters (companies and and-trade program being developed by a level of CO2e. Many of the State rules
other organizations that have agreed to group of Western States and Canadian apply to six GHGs (CO2, CH4, N2O,
voluntarily report their GHG emissions) provinces. The goal is to reduce GHG HFCs, PFCs, SF6); others apply only to
implemented a pilot reporting program emissions to 15 percent below 2005 CO2 or a subset of the six gases. Most
in 2008. Annual reports would be levels by the year 2020. Draft options require reporting at the facility level, or
submitted covering six GHGs. papers and program scope papers were by unit or process within a facility.
Corporations must report facility- released in early 2008, public comments The level of specificity regarding GHG
specific emissions, broken out by type were reviewed, and final program monitoring and calculation methods
of emission source (e.g., stationary design recommendations were made in varies. Some of the States refer to use of
combustion, electricity use, direct September 2008. Other elements of the protocols established by TCR or CCAR.
process emissions) within the facility. program, such as reporting Others look to industry-specific
requirements, market operations, and protocols (such as methods developed
E. State and Regional Mandatory offset program development continues.
Programs for GHG Emissions Reporting by the American Petroleum Institute), to
Several source categories are being accepted international methodologies
and Reduction considered for inclusion in the cap and such as IPCC, and/or to emission factors
Several individual States and regional trade framework. The program might be in EPA’s Compilation of Air Pollutant
groups of States have demonstrated phased in, starting with a few source
26 These include: California, Colorado,
22 For more information about CCAR please see: 24 For more information about RGGI please see: Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine,
http://www.climateregistry.org/. http://www.rggi.org/. Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico,
23 For more information about TCR please see: 25 For more information about WCI please see: North Carolina, Oregon, Virginia, Washington, West
http://www.theclimateregistry.org/. http://www.westernclimateinitiative.org/. Virginia, and Wisconsin.
Emission Factors (known as AP–42 27) international voluntary and mandatory III. Summary of the General
or other EPA guidance. GHG programs, and our review of State Requirements of the Proposed Rule
California Mandatory GHG Reporting mandatory GHG rules can be found at The proposed rule would require
Rule.28 CARB’s mandatory reporting EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–056. The reporting of annual emissions of CO2,
rule is an example of a State rule that proposed monitoring and GHG CH4, N2O, SF6, HFCs, PFCs, and other
covers multiple source categories and calculation methodologies for many fluorinated gases (as defined in
contains relatively detailed source categories are the same as, or proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart A).
requirements, similar to this proposal similar to, the methodologies contained The rule would apply to certain
developed by EPA. According to the in State reporting programs such as
CARB proposed rule (originally downstream facilities that emit GHGs,
TCR, CCAR, and State mandatory GHG upstream suppliers of fossil fuels and
proposed October 19, 2007, and revised reporting rules and similar to
on December 5, 2007), monitoring must industrial GHGs, and manufacturers of
methodologies developed by EPA vehicles and engines.29 We are
start on January 1, 2009, and the first voluntary programs such as Climate
reports will be submitted in 2010. The proposing that reporting be at the
Leaders. The reporting requirements set facility 30 level, except that certain
rule requires facility-level reporting of forth in 40 CFR part 75 are also being
all GHGs, except PFCs, from cement suppliers of fossil fuels and industrial
used for this proposed rule. Similarity gases and manufacturers of vehicles and
manufacturing plants, electric power in proposed methods would help
generation and retail, cogeneration engines would report at the corporate
maximize the ability of individual level.
plants, petroleum refineries, hydrogen reporters to submit the emissions
plants, and facilities with stationary calculations to multiple programs, if A. Who must report?
combustion sources emitting greater
desired. EPA also continues to work Owners and operators of the following
than 25,000 tons CO2 per year.
closely with States and State-based facilities and supply operations would
California requires 40 CFR part 75 data
groups to ensure that the data submit annual GHG emission reports
for EGUs. The California rule contains
management approach in this proposal under the proposal:
specific GHG estimation methods that
are largely consistent with CCAR would lead to efficient submission of • A facility that contains any of the
protocols, and also rely on American data to multiple programs. Section V of source categories listed below in any
Petroleum Institute protocols and IPCC/ this preamble includes further calendar year starting in 2010. For
EU protocols for certain types of information on the selection of these facilities, the GHG emission
sources. California continues to monitoring methods for each source report would cover all sources in any
participate in other national and category. source category for which calculation
regional efforts, such as TCR and WCI, The intent of this proposed rule is to methodologies are provided in
to assist with developing consistent collect accurate and consistent GHG proposed 40 CFR part 98, subparts B
reporting tools and procedures on a emissions data that can be used to through JJ.
national and regional basis. inform future decisions. One goal in —Electricity generating facilities that
developing the rule is to utilize and be are subject to the ARP, or that
F. How the Proposed Mandatory GHG contain electric generating units
Reporting Program Is Different From the consistent with the GHG protocols and
requirements of other State and Federal that collectively emit 25,000 metric
Federal and State Programs EPA tons of CO2e or more per year.31
Reviewed programs, where appropriate, to make
use of existing cooperative efforts and —Adipic acid production.
The various existing State and Federal reduce the burden to facilities —Aluminum production.
programs EPA reviewed are diverse. submitting reports to other programs. —Ammonia manufacturing.
They apply to different industries, have However, we also need to be sure the —Cement production.
different thresholds, require different mandatory reporting rule collects —Electronics—Semiconductor,
pollutants and different types of facility-specific data of sufficient quality MEMS, and LCD (LCD)
emissions sources to be reported, rely to achieve the Agency’s objectives for manufacturing facilities with an
on different monitoring protocols, and annual production capacity that
this rule. Therefore, some reporting
require different types of data to be exceeds any of the thresholds listed
requirements of this proposed rule are
reported, depending on the purposes of in this paragraph—Semiconductors:
different from the State programs. The
each program. None of the existing
remaining sections of this preamble
programs require nationwide, 29 We are proposing to incorporate the reporting
further describe the proposed rule
mandatory GHG reporting by facilities requirements for manufacturers of motor vehicles
in a large number of sectors, so EPA’s requirements and EPA’s rationale for all and engines into the existing reporting
proposed mandatory GHG rule of the requirements. requirements of 40 CFR parts 86, 89, 90, 91, 92, 94,
1033, 1039, 1042, 1045, 1048, 1051, and 1054.
development effort is unique in this EPA seeks comment on whether the 30 For the purposes of this proposal, facility
regard. conclusions drawn during its review of means any physical property, plant, building,
Although the mandatory GHG rule is existing programs are accurate and structure, source, or stationary equipment located
unique, EPA carefully considered other invites data to demonstrate if, and if so on one or more contiguous or adjacent properties
in actual physical contact or separated solely by a
Federal and State programs during how, the goals and objectives of this public roadway or other public right-of-way and
development of the proposed rule. proposed mandatory reporting system under common ownership or common control, that
Documentation of our review of GHG could be met through existing programs. emits or may emit any greenhouse gas. Operators
monitoring protocols for each source In particular, comments should address of military installations may classify such
installations as more than a single facility based on
category used by Federal, State, and how existing programs meet the breadth distinct and independent functional groupings
of sources reporting, thresholds for within contiguous military properties.
27 See Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission
reporting, consistency and stringency of 31 This does not include portable equipment or
Factors, Fifth Edition: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ methods for reporting, level of generating units designated as emergency
chief/ap42/index.html_ac/index.html. generators in a permit issued by a state or local air
28 For more information about CA mandatory reporting, frequency of reporting and pollution control agency. As described in section
reporting program please see: http:// verification of reports included in this V.C of the preamble we are taking comment on
www.arb.ca.gov/cc/reporting/ghg-rep/ghg-rep.htm. proposal. whether or not a permit should be required.
1,080 m2 silicon, MEMS: 1,202 m2 • Any facility that in any calendar year engines and complete vehicles, (3)
silicon, LCD: 235,700 m2 LCD. starting in 2010 meets all three of the manufacturers of nonroad diesel
—Electric power systems that include conditions listed in this paragraph. engines and nonroad large spark-
electrical equipment with a total For these facilities, the GHG emission ignition engines, (4) manufacturers of
nameplace capacity that exceeds report would cover emissions from nonroad small spark-ignition engines,
17,820 lbs (7,838 kg) of SF6 or PFCs. stationary fuel combustion sources marine spark-ignition engines,
—HCFC–22 production. only. For 2010 only, the facilities can personal watercraft, highway
—HFC–23 destruction processes that submit an abbreviated emissions motorcycles, and recreational engines
are not colocated with a HCFC–22 report according to proposed 40 CFR and vehicles, (5) manufacturers of
production facility and that destroy 98.3(d). locomotive and marine diesel engines,
more than 2.14 metric tons of HFC– —The facility does not contain any and (6) manufacturers of jet and
23 per year. source in any source category turboprop aircraft engines.
—Lime manufacturing. designated in the above two B. Schedule for Reporting
—Nitric acid production. paragraphs;
—Petrochemical production. —The aggregate maximum rated heat Facilities and suppliers would begin
—Petroleum refineries. input capacity of the stationary fuel collecting data on January 1, 2010. The
—Phosphoric acid production. combustion units at the facility is first emissions report would be due on
—Silicon carbide production. 30 mmBtu/hr or greater; and March 31, 2011, for emissions during
—Soda ash production. —The facility emits 25,000 metric 2010.35 36 Reports would be submitted
—Titanium dioxide production. tons CO2e or more per year from all annually. Facilities with EGUs that are
—Underground coal mines that are stationary fuel combustion subject to the ARP would continue to
subject to quarterly or more sources.33 report CO2 mass emissions quarterly, as
frequent sampling by MSHA of • Any supplier of any of the products required by the ARP, in addition to
ventilation systems. listed below in any calendar year providing the annual GHG emissions
—Municipal landfills that generate starting in 2010. For these suppliers, reports under this rule. EPA is
CH4 in amounts equivalent to the GHG emissions report would proposing that the rule require the
25,000 metric tons CO2e or more cover all applicable products for submission of GHG emissions data on
per year. which calculation methodologies are an ongoing, annual basis. The snapshot
—Manure management systems that provided in proposed 40 CFR part 98, of information provided by a one-time
emit CH4 and N2O in amounts subparts KK through PP. information collection request would
equivalent to 25,000 metric tons —Coal. not provide the type of ongoing
CO2e or more per year. —Coal-based liquid fuels. information which could inform the
• Any facility that emits 25,000 metric —Petroleum products. variety of potential policy options being
tons CO2e or more per year in —Natural gas and NGLs. evaluated for addressing climate change.
combined emissions from stationary —Industrial GHGs: All producers of EPA is taking comment on other
fuel combustion units, miscellaneous industrial GHGs, importers and possible options, including a
use of carbonates and all of the source exporters of industrial GHGs with commitment to review the continued
categories listed below that are total bulk imports or total bulk need for the information at a specific
located at the facility in any calendar exports that exceed 25,000 metric later date, or a sunset provision. Once
year starting in 2010. For these tons CO2e per year. subject to this reporting rule, a facility
facilities, the GHG emission report —CO2: All producers of CO2, or supply operation would continue to
would cover all source categories for importers and exporters of CO2 or a submit reports even if it falls below the
which calculation methodologies are combination of CO2 and other reporting thresholds in future years.
provided in proposed 40 CFR part 98, industrial GHGs with total bulk C. What do I have to report?
subparts B through JJ of the rule. imports or total bulk exports that
—Electricity Generation 32 exceed 25,000 metric tons CO2e per The report would include total annual
—Electronics—Photovoltaic year. GHG emissions in metric tons of CO2e
Manufacturing • Manufacturers of mobile sources and aggregated for all the source categories
—Ethanol Production engines would be required to report and for all supply categories for which
—Ferroalloy Production emissions from the vehicles and emission calculation methods are
—Fluorinated Greenhouse Gas engines they produce, generally in provided in part 98. The report would
Production terms of an emission rate.34 These also separately present annual mass
—Food Processing requirements would apply to GHG emissions for each source category
—Glass Production emissions of CO2, CH4, N2O, and, and supply category, by gas. Separate
—Hydrogen Production where appropriate, HFCs. reporting requirements are provided for
—Iron and Steel Production Manufacturers of the following vehicle and engine manufacturers.
—Lead Production vehicle and engine types would need These sources would be required to
—Magnesium Production report emissions from the vehicles and
to report: (1) Manufacturers of
—Oil and Natural Gas Systems engines they produce, generally in terms
passenger cars, light trucks, and
—Pulp and Paper Manufacturing of an emission rate.
medium-duty passenger vehicles, (2) Within a given source category, the
—Zinc Production manufacturers of highway heavy-duty
—Industrial Landfills report also would break out emissions at
—Wastewater 33 This does not include portable equipment or
the level required by the respective
generating units designated as emergency subpart (e.g., reporting could be
32 This does not include portable equipment or generators in a permit issued by a state or local air
generating units designated as emergency pollution control agency. As described in section V. 35 Unless otherwise noted, years and dates in this
generators in a permit issued by a state or local air C of the preamble we are taking comment on notice refer to calendar years and dates.
pollution control agency. As described in section whether or not a permit should be required. 36 There is a discussion in section I.IV of this
V.C of the preamble we are taking comment on 34 As discussed in Section V.QQ, manufacturers preamble that takes comment on alternative
whether or not a permit should be required. below a size threshold would be exempt. reporting schedules.
required for each individual unit for • The GHG emissions calculations approaches should be adopted. In
some source categories and for each and methods used; particular, EPA would like information
process line for other source categories). • All emission factors used for the on the technical feasibility, costs, and
In addition to GHG emissions, you GHG emissions calculations; relative improvement in accuracy of
would report certain activity data (e.g., • Any facility operating data or direct measurement at facilities. If
fuel use, feedstock inputs) that were process information used for the GHG suggesting an alternative methodology
used to generate the emissions data. The emissions calculations; (e.g., using established industry default
required activity data are specified in • Names and documentation of key factors or allowing industry groups to
each subpart. For some source facility personnel involved in propose an industry specific emission
categories, additional data would be calculating and reporting the GHG factor to EPA), please discuss whether
reported to support QA/QC and emissions; and how it provides complete and
verification. • The annual GHG emissions reports; accurate emissions data, comparable to
EPA would protect any information • A log book documenting any
other source categories, and also reflects
claimed as CBI in accordance with procedural changes to the GHG
broadly agreed upon calculation
regulations in 40 CFR part 2, subpart B. emissions accounting methods and any
procedures for that source category.
However, note that in general, emission changes to the instrumentation critical
to GHG emissions calculations; (3) Frequency and year of reporting.
data collected under CAA sections 114
and 208 cannot be considered CBI.37 • Missing data computations; EPA is interested in receiving data and
• A written QAPP; analyses regarding frequency of
D. How do I submit the report? • Any other data specified in any reporting and the schedule for reporting.
The reports would be submitted applicable subpart of proposed 40 CFR In particular, we solicit information
electronically, in a format to be part 98. Examples of such data could regarding whether the frequency of data
specified by the Administrator after include the results of sampling and collection and reporting selected by
publication of the final rule.38 To the analysis procedures required by the EPA is appropriate for each source
extent practicable, we plan to adapt subparts (e.g., fuel heat content, carbon category or whether alternative
existing facility reporting programs to content of raw materials, and flow rate) frequencies should be considered (e.g.,
accept GHG emissions data. We are and other data used to calculate quarterly or every few years). If
developing a new electronic data emissions. suggesting an alternative frequency,
reporting system for source categories or IV. Rationale for the General Reporting, please discuss whether and how it
suppliers for which it is not feasible to Recordkeeping and Verification ensures that EPA and the public receive
use existing reporting mechanisms. Requirements That Apply to All Source the data in a timely fashion that allow
Each report would contain a signed Categories it to be relevant for future policy
certification by a Designated decisions. EPA is proposing 2010 data
This section of the preamble explains collection and 2011 reporting, however,
Representative of the facility. On behalf
the rationales for EPA’s proposals for we are interested in receiving comment
of the owner or operator, the Designated
various aspects of the rule. This section on alternative schedules if we are
Representative would certify under
applies to all of the source categories in unable to meet our goal.
penalty of law that the report has been
the preamble (further discussed in
prepared in accordance with the (4) Verification. EPA is interested in
Sections V.B through V.PP of this
requirements of 40 CFR part 98 and that receiving data and analyses regarding
preamble) with the exception of mobile
the information contained in the report verification options. We solicit input on
sources (discussed in Section V.QQ of
is true and accurate, based on a whether the verification approach
this preamble). The proposals EPA is
reasonable inquiry of individuals selected by EPA is appropriate for each
making with regard to mobile sources
responsible for obtaining the source category or whether an
are extensions of existing EPA programs
information. alternative approach should be adopted.
and therefore the rationales and
E. What records must I retain? decisions are discussed wholly within If suggesting an alternative verification
that section. With respect to the source approach, please discuss how it weighs
Each facility or supplier would also the costs and burden to the reporter and
have to retain and make available to categories B through PP, EPA is
particularly interested in receiving EPA as well as the need to ensure the
EPA upon request the following records data are complete, accurate, and
for five years in an electronic or hard- comments on the following issues:
(1) Reporting thresholds. EPA is available in the timely fashion.
copy format as appropriate:
• A list of all units, operations, interested in receiving data and analyses (5) Duration of the program. EPA is
processes and activities for which GHG on thresholds. In particular, we solicit interested in receiving data and analyses
emissions are calculated; comment on whether the thresholds regarding options for the duration of the
• The data used to calculate the GHG proposed are appropriate for each GHG emissions information collection
emissions for each unit, operation, source category or whether other program in this proposed rule. By
process, and activity, categorized by fuel emissions or capacity based thresholds duration, EPA means for how many
or material type; should be applied. If suggesting years the program should require the
• Documentation of the process used alternative thresholds, please discuss submission of information. EPA solicits
to collect the necessary data for the GHG whether and how they would achieve input on whether the duration selected
emissions calculations; broad emissions coverage and result in by EPA is appropriate for each source
a reasonable number of reporters. category or whether an alternative
37 Although CBI determinations are usually made (2) Methodologies. EPA is interested approach should be adopted. If
on a case-by-case basis, EPA has issued guidance in receiving data, technical information suggesting an alternative duration,
in an earlier Federal Register notice on what and analyses relevant to the please discuss how it impacts the need
constitutes emissions data that cannot be methodology approach. We solicit to ensure the data are sufficient to
considered CBI (956 FR 7042–7043, February 21,
1991). comment on whether the methodologies inform the variety of potential policy
38 For more information about the reporting selected by EPA are appropriate for each decisions regarding climate change
format please see section VI of this preamble. source category or whether alternative under consideration.
A. Rationale for Selection of GHGs To HFCs. As such, EPA is proposing to heating effect. Therefore, these gases
Report include reporting of these gases to share common climatic properties with
The proposed rule would require ensure that the Agency has an accurate the other GHGs discussed in this
reporting of CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, understanding of the emissions and uses preamble. The production and
SF6, and other fluorinated compounds of these gases, particularly as those uses consumption of these substances (and,
(e.g., NF3 and HFEs) as defined in the expand. hence, their anthropogenic emissions)
rule 39. These are the most abundantly There are other GHGs and aerosols are being controlled and phased out, not
emitted GHGs that result from human that have climatic warming effects that because of their effects on climate
activity. They are not currently we are not proposing to include in this change, but because they deplete
controlled by other mandatory Federal rule: Water vapor, CFCs, HCFCs, halons, stratospheric O3, which protects against
programs and, with the exception of the tropospheric O3, and black carbon. harmful ultraviolet B radiation. The
CO2 emissions data reported by EGUs There are a number of reasons why we control and phase-out of these
subject to the ARP 40, GHG emissions are not proposing to require reporting of substances in the U.S. and globally is
data are also not reported under other these gases and aerosols under this rule. occurring under the Montreal Protocol
mandatory Federal programs. CO2 is the For example, these GHGs and aerosols on Substances that Deplete the Ozone
largest contributor of GHGs directly are not covered under any State or Layer, and in the U.S. under Title VI of
emitted by human activities, and is a Federal voluntary or mandatory GHG the CAA as well.42 Therefore, the
significant driver of climate change. The program, the UNFCCC or the Inventory climate change research and policy
anthropogenic combined heating effect of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and community typically does not focus on
of CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, SF6, and the Sinks. Nonetheless, we request these substances, precisely because they
other fluorinated compounds are also comment on the selection of GHGs that are essentially already being addressed
significant: About 40 percent as large as are or are not included in the proposed with non-climate policy mechanisms.
the CO2 heating effect according to the rule; include data supporting your The UNFCCC does not cover these
Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC. position on why a GHG should or substances, and instead defers their
The IPCC focuses on CO2, CH4, N2O, should not be included. More detailed treatment to the Montreal Protocol.
HFCs, PFCs, and SF6 for both scientific discussions for particular substances Tropospheric Ozone. Increased
assessments and emissions inventory that we do not propose including in this concentrations of tropospheric O3 are
purposes because these are long-lived, rule follow. causing a significant anthropogenic
well-mixed GHGs not controlled by the Water Vapor. Water vapor is the most warming effect, but, unlike the long-
Montreal Protocol as Substances that abundant naturally occurring GHG and, lived GHGs, tropospheric O3 has a short
Deplete the Ozone Layer. These GHGs therefore, makes up a significant share atmospheric lifetime (hours to weeks),
are directly emitted by human activities, of the natural, background greenhouse and therefore its concentrations are
are reported annually in EPA’s effect. However, water vapor emissions more variable over space and time. For
Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas from human activities have only a these reasons, its global heating effect
Emissions and Sinks, and are the negligible effect on atmospheric and relevance to climate change tends to
common focus of the climate change concentrations of water vapor. entail greater uncertainty compared to
research community. The IPCC also Significant changes to global the well-mixed, long-lived GHGs.
included methods for accounting for atmospheric concentrations of water Tropospheric O3 is not addressed under
emissions from several specified vapor occur indirectly through human- the UNFCCC. Moreover, tropospheric O3
fluorinated gases in the 2006 IPCC induced global warming, which then is already listed as a NAAQS pollutant
Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas increases the amount of water vapor in and its precursors are reported to States.
Inventories.41 These gases include the atmosphere because a warmer Tropospheric O3 is subsequently
fluorinated ethers, which are used in atmosphere can hold more moisture. modeled based on the precursor data
electronics, anesthetics, and as heat Therefore, changes in water vapor reported to the NEI.
transfer fluids. Like the other six GHGs concentrations are not an initial driver Black Carbon. Black carbon is an
for which emissions would be reported, of climate change, but rather an effect of aerosol particle that results from
these fluorinated compounds are long- climate change which then acts as a incomplete combustion of the carbon
positive feedback that further enhances contained in fossil fuels, and it remains
lived in the atmosphere and have high
warming. For this reason, the IPCC does in the atmosphere for about a week.
GWP. In many cases these fluorinated
not list direct emissions of water vapor There is some evidence that black
gases are used in expanding industries
as an anthropogenic forcing agent of carbon emissions may contribute to
(e.g., electronics) or as substitutes for
climate change, but does include this climate warming by absorbing incoming
39 The GWPs for the GHGs to be reported are
water vapor feedback mechanism in and reflected sunlight in the atmosphere
found in Table A–1 of proposed 40 CFR part 98, response to human-induced warming in and by darkening clouds, snow and ice.
subpart A. all modeling scenarios of future climate While the net effect of anthropogenic
40 Pursuant to regulations established under change. Based on this recognition that aerosols has a cooling effect (CCSP
section 821 of the CAA Amendments of 1990, anthropogenic emissions of water vapor
hourly CO2 emissions are monitored and reported 2009), there is considerable uncertainty
quarterly to EPA. EPA performs a series of QA/QC
are not a significant driver of
checks on the data and then makes it available on anthropogenic climate change, EPA’s 42 Under the Montreal Protocol, production and
the Web site (http://epa.gov/camddataandmaps/) annual Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse consumption of CFCs were phased out in developed
usually within 30 days after receipt. Gas Emissions and Sinks does not countries in 1996 (with some essential use
41 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse exemptions) and are scheduled for phase-out by
include water vapor, and GHG
Gas Inventories. The National Greenhouse Gas 2010 in developing countries (with some essential
Inventories Programme, H.S. Eggleston, L. Buendia, inventory reporting guidelines under use exemptions). For halons the schedule was 1994
K. Miwa, T. Ngara, and K. Tanabe (eds), hereafter the UNFCCC do not require data on for phase out in developed countries and 2010 for
referred to as the ‘‘2006 IPCC Guidelines’’ are found water vapor emissions. developing countries; HCFC production was frozen
at: http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/methodology- ODS. The CFCs, HCFCs, and halons in 2004 in developed countries, and in 2016
reports.htm. For additional information on these production will be frozen in developing countries;
gases please see Table A–1 in proposed 40 CFR part
are all strong anthropogenic GHGs that and HCFC consumption phase-out dates are 2030
98, subpart A and the Suppliers of Industrial GHGs are long-lived in the atmosphere and are for developed countries and 2040 in developing
TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–041). adding to the global anthropogenic countries.
in quantifying the effects of black international, national, regional, and feasible and result in sufficiently
carbon on radiative forcing and whether corporate-level GHG reporting accurate and consistent estimates,
black carbon specifically has direct or programs, this proposal includes only facility-level reporting would improve
indirect warming effects. The National anthropogenic sources. current inventory estimates and EPA’s
Academy of Sciences states As a second step, EPA considered all understanding of the types and levels of
‘‘Regulations targeting black carbon of the source categories in the Inventory emissions coming from large facilities,
emissions or ozone precursors would of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and particularly in the industrial sector.
have combined benefits for public Sinks because, as described in Section These source categories have been
health and climate’’ 43 while also I.D of this preamble, it is a top-down included in the proposal. For other
indicating that the level of scientific assessment of anthropogenic sources of source categories, uncertainty about
understanding regarding the effect of emissions in the U.S. Furthermore, the emissions is related more to the
black carbon on climate is ‘‘very low.’’ Inventory has been independently unavailability of emission factors or
The direct and indirect radiative forcing reviewed by national and international simple models to estimate emissions
properties of multiple aerosols, experts and is considered to be a accurately and at a reasonable cost at
including sulphates, organic carbon, comprehensive representation of the facility-level. Under this criterion,
and black carbon, are not well national-level GHG emissions and we would require facility-level reporting
understood. While mobile diesel source categories relevant for the U.S. only if reporting would provide more
engines have been the largest black As a third step, EPA also carefully accurate estimates than can be obtained
carbon source in the U.S., these reviewed the recently completed 2006 by other means, such as national or
emissions are expected to be reduced IPCC Guidelines for National regional-level modeling. For an
significantly over the next several Greenhouse Gas Inventories for example, please refer to the discussion
decades based on CDPFs for new additional source categories that may be below on emissions from agricultural
vehicles. relevant for the U.S. These international sources and other land uses.
guidelines are just beginning to be As the Agency completed its four step
B. Rationale for Selection of Source incorporated into national inventories. evaluation of source categories to
Categories To Report The 2006 IPCC Guidelines identified include in the proposal, some source
Section III of this preamble lists the one additional source category for categories were excluded from
source categories that would submit consideration (fugitive emissions from consideration and some were added.
reports under the proposed rule. The fluorinated GHG production). The reasons for the additions and
source categories identified in this list As a fourth step, once EPA had a deletions are explained below. In
were selected after considering the complete list of source categories general, the proposed reporting rule
language of the Appropriations Act and relevant to the U.S., the Agency covers almost all of the source
the accompanying explanatory systematically reviewed those source categories in the Inventory of U.S.
statement, and EPA’s experience in categories against the following criteria Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks
developing the U.S. GHG Inventory. The to develop the list to the source and the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for
Appropriations Act referred to reporting categories included in the proposal: National Greenhouse Gas Inventories.
‘‘in all sectors of the economy’’ and the (1) Include source categories that emit Reporting by direct emitters.
explanatory statement directed EPA to the most significant amounts of GHG Consistent with the appropriations
include ‘‘emissions from upstream emissions, while also minimizing the language regarding reporting of
production and downstream sources to number of reporters, and emissions from ‘‘downstream sources,’’
the extent the Administrator deems it (2) Include source categories that can EPA is proposing reporting
appropriate.’’ 44 In developing the be measured with an appropriate level requirements from facilities that directly
proposed list, we also used our of accuracy. emit GHGs above a certain threshold as
significant experience in quantifying To accomplish the first criterion, EPA a result of combustion of fuel or
GHG emissions from source categories set reporting thresholds, as described in processes. The majority of the direct
across the economy for the Inventory of Section IV.C of this preamble, that are emitters included in this proposal are
U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and designed to target large emitters. When large facilities in the electricity
Sinks. the proposed thresholds are applied, the generation or industrial sectors. In
As a starting point, EPA first source categories included in this addition, many of the electricity
considered all anthropogenic sources of proposal meet the criterion of balancing generation facilities are already
GHG emissions. The term the emissions coverage with a reporting their CO2 emissions to EPA
‘‘anthropogenic’’ refers to emissions that reasonable number of reporters. For under existing regulations. As such,
are produced as a result of human more detailed information about the these facilities have only a minimal
activities (e.g., combustion of coal in an coverage of emissions and number of increase in the amount of data they have
electric utility or CH4 emissions from a reporters see the Thresholds TSD (EPA– to provide EPA on their CH4 and N2O
landfill). This is in contrast to GHGs HQ–OAR–2008–0508–046) and the RIA emissions. The typical industrial
that are emitted to the atmosphere as a (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–002). facilities that are required to report
result of natural activities, such as The second criterion was to require under this proposal have emissions that
volcanoes. Anthropogenic emissions reporting for only those sources for are substantially higher than the
may be of biogenic origin (manure which measurement capabilities are proposed thresholds and are already
lagoons) or non-biogenic origin (e.g., sufficiently accurate and consistent. doing many of the measurements and
coal mines). Consistent with existing Under this criterion, EPA considered quantifications of emissions required by
whether or not facility reporting would this proposal through existing business
43 National Academy of Sciences, ‘‘Radiative be as effective as other means of practices, voluntary programs, or
Forcing of Climate Change: Expanding the Concept obtaining emissions data. For some mandatory State-level GHG reporting
and Addressing Uncertainties,’’ October 2005. sources, our understanding of emissions
44 To read the full appropriations language please
programs.
refer to the links on this Web site: http://
is limited by lack of knowledge of For more information about the
www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/ source-specific factors. In instances thresholds included in this proposal
ghgrulemaking.html. where facility-specific calculations are please refer to Section IV.C of this
preamble and for more information under this proposal, similar to other fuel combustion could result in some
about the requirements for specific producers. For more information about sources being under the threshold. For
sources refer to Section V of this these source categories please see the more information about this analysis
preamble. source-specific discussions in Section V and the differences in the number of
Reporting by fuel and industrial GHG of this preamble. reporters and coverage of emissions,
suppliers. 45 Consistent with the There is inherent double-reporting of please see the RIA (EPA–HQ–OAR–
appropriations language regarding emissions in a program that includes 2008–0508–002).
reporting of emissions from ‘‘upstream both upstream and downstream sources. Emissions from agricultural sources
production,’’ EPA is proposing reporting For example, coal mines would report and other land uses. The proposed rule
requirements from upstream suppliers CO2 emissions that would be produced does not require reporting of GHG
of fossil fuel and industrial GHGs. In the from combustion of the coal supplied emissions from enteric fermentation,
context of GHG reporting, ‘‘upstream into the economy, and the receiving rice cultivation, field burning of
emissions’’ refers to the GHG emissions power plants are already reporting CO2 agricultural residues, composting (other
potential of a quantity of industrial gas emissions to EPA from burning the coal than as part of a manure management
or fossil fuel supplied into the economy. to generate electricity. This double- system), agricultural soil management,
For fossil fuels, the emissions potential reporting is nevertheless consistent with or other land uses and land-use changes,
is the amount of CO2 that would be the appropriations language, and such as emissions associated with
produced from complete combustion or provides valuable information to EPA deforestation, and carbon storage in
oxidation of the carbon in the fuel. In and stakeholders in the development of living biomass or harvested wood
many cases, the fossil fuels and climate change policy and programs. products. As discussed in Section V of
industrial GHGs supplied by producers Policies such as low-carbon fuel this preamble, the proposal does
and importers are used and ultimately standards can only be applied upstream, include reporting of emissions from
emitted by a large number of small whereas end-use emission standards can manure management systems.
sources, particularly in the commercial only be applied downstream. Data from EPA reports on the GHG emissions
and residential sectors (e.g., HFCs upstream and downstream sources and sinks associated with agricultural
emitted from home A/C units or GHG would be necessary to formulate and
and land-use sources in the Inventory of
emissions from individual motor assess the impacts of such potential
U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and
vehicles).46 To cover these direct policies. EPA recognizes the double-
Sinks. In the agriculture sector, the U.S.
emissions would require reporting by reporting and as discussed in Section
GHG inventory report estimated that
hundreds or thousands of small I.D of this preamble does not intend to
agricultural soil management, which
facilities. To avoid this impact, the use the upstream and downstream
includes fertilizer application
proposed rule does not include all of emissions data as a replacement for the
(including synthetic and manure
those emitters, but instead requires national emissions estimates found in
fertilizers, etc.), contributed N2O
reporting by the suppliers of industrial the Inventory.
It is possible to construct a reporting emissions of 265 million metric tons
gases and suppliers of fossil fuels.
Because the GHGs in these products are system with no double-reporting. For CO2e in 2006 and enteric fermentation
almost always fully emitted during use, example, such a system could include contributed CH4 emissions of 126
reporting these supply data would fossil fuel combustion-related emissions million metric tons CO2e in 2006. These
provide an accurate estimate of national upstream only, based on the fuel amounts reflect 3.8 percent and 1.8
emissions while substantially reducing suppliers, supplemented by emissions percent of total GHG emissions from
the number of reporters.47 For this reported downstream for industrial anthropogenic sources in 2006. Rice
reason, the proposed rule requires processes at select industries (e.g., CO2 cultivation, agricultural field burning,
reporting by suppliers of coal and coal- process emissions from the production and composting (other than as part of a
based products, petroleum products, of cement); fugitive emissions from coal, manure management system)
natural gas and NGLs, CO2 gas, and oil, and gas operations; biological contributed emissions of 5.9, 1.2, and
other industrial GHGs. We are not processes and mobile source 3.3 million metric tons CO2e,
proposing to require reporting by manufacturers. Industrial GHG respectively in 2006. Total carbon
suppliers of biomass-based fuels, or suppliers could be captured completely fluxes, rather than specific emissions
renewable fuels, due to the fact that upstream, thereby removing reporting from deforestation, for U.S. forestlands
GHGs emitted upon combustion of these obligations from the use of the and other land uses and land-use
fuels are traditionally taken into account industrial gases by large downstream changes were also reported in the U.S.
at the point of biomass production. users (e.g., magnesium production and GHG inventory report.
However, we seek comment on this SF6 in electric power systems). Under The challenges to including these
approach and note that producers of this option, the total number of facilities direct emission source categories in the
some biomass-based fuels (e.g., ethanol) affected is approximately 32% lower rule are that practical reporting methods
would be subject to reporting than the proposed option, and the to estimate facility-level emissions for
requirements for their on-site emissions private sector costs are approximately these sources can be difficult to
26% lower than the proposed option. implement and can yield uncertain
45 In this context, suppliers include producers, The emissions coverage remains largely results. For more information on
importers, and exporters of fossil fuels and the same as the proposed option uncertainty for these sources, please
industrial GHGs. although it is important to note that refer to the TSD for Biological Process
46 While EPA is not proposing any reporting
some process related emissions may not Sources Excluded from this Rule (EPA–
requirements in this rule for operators of mobile
source fleets, we are requesting comment in Section be captured due to the fact that HQ–OAR–2008–0508–045).
V.QQ.4.b of the Preamble. downstream combustion sources would Furthermore, these sources are
47 As an example of estimating the CO emissions
2 not be covered under this option. A characterized by a large number of small
that result from the combustion of fossil fuels, source with process emission plus emitters. In light of these challenges, we
please see, 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National
Greenhouse Gas Inventories, Volume 2—Energy,
combustion emissions would only have have determined that it is impractical to
Chapter 1—Introduction (http://www.ipcc- to report their process emission, thus require reporting of emissions from
nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/index.html). the exclusion of downstream these sources in the proposed rule at
this time for the reasons explained consideration for inclusion in this rule. exceed a threshold as specified in
below. For some agricultural source categories, proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart A
For these sources, currently, there are the number of individual farms covered would be required to submit annual
no direct greenhouse gas emission at various thresholds was estimated. GHG reports.
measurement methods available except The resulting analyses showed that for The thresholds are expressed in
for research methods that are most of these sources no facilities would several ways (e.g., actual emissions or
prohibitively expensive and require exceed any of the thresholds evaluated. capacity). The use of these different
sophisticated equipment. Instead, Because facility-level reporting is types of thresholds is discussed later in
limited modeling-based methods have impracticable, the proposed rule this section, but most correspond to an
been developed for voluntary GHG contains other provisions to improve annual facility-wide emission level of
reporting protocols which use general our understanding of emissions from 25,000 metric tons of CO2e, and the
emission factors, and large-scale models these source categories. For example, thresholds result in covering
have been developed to produce agricultural soil management is a approximately 85–90 percent of U.S.
comprehensive national-level emissions significant source of N2O. Activity data, emissions. That level is largely
estimates, such as those reported in the including synthetic nitrogen-based consistent with many of the existing
U.S. GHG inventory report. fertilizer applications, influence N2O GHG reporting programs, including
To calculate emissions using emission emissions from this agricultural source California, which also has a 25,000
factor or carbon stock change category. To gain additional information metric ton of CO2e threshold.
approaches, it would be necessary for on synthetic nitrogen-based fertilizers, Furthermore, many industry
landowners to report on management EPA is proposing that the industrial stakeholders that EPA met with
practices, and a variety of data inputs. facilities reporting under this rule expressed support for a 25,000 metric
Activity data collection and emission include information on the production ton of CO2e threshold because it
factor development necessary for and nitrogen content of fertilizers as sufficiently captures the majority of
emissions calculations at the scale of part of their annual reports to EPA. It is GHG emissions in the U.S., while
individual reporters can be complex and estimated that all of the synthetic excluding smaller facilities and
costly. nitrogen-based fertilizer produced in the sources.51 The three exceptions to the
For example, for calculating U.S. is manufactured by industrial 25,000 metric ton of CO2e threshold are
emissions of N2O from agricultural soils, facilities that are covered under this rule electricity production at selected units
data on nitrogen inputs necessary for subject to existing Federal programs,
due to onsite combustion-related and
accurate emissions calculations include: fugitive emissions from coal mining,
industrial process emissions (e.g.,
Synthetic fertilizer, organic and emissions from mobile sources.
ammonia manufacturing facilities). The
amendments (manure and sludge), These thresholds were selected to be
reporting requirements are contained in
waste from grazing animals, crop consistent with existing thresholds for
proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart A.
residues, and mineralization of soil reporting similar data to EPA and the
EPA is requesting comment on this
organic matter. While some activity data MSHA. The proposed thresholds
approach. In particular, the Agency is
can be collected with reasonable maximized the rule coverage with over
looking for information on the
certainty, the emissions estimates could 85 percent of U.S. emissions reported by
usefulness of the fertilizer data for
still have a high degree of uncertainty approximately 13,000 reporters, while
estimating N2O emissions from
because the emission factors available keeping reporting burden to a minimum
agricultural soils, and also on including
for individual reporters do not reflect and excluding small emitters.
other possible reporters of synthetic
the variety of conditions (e.g., soil type, Consideration of alternative emissions
moisture) that need to be considered for nitrogen-based fertilizers, such as
thresholds. In selecting the proposed
accurate estimates. fertilizer wholesalers or distributors, or
threshold level, we considered two
Without reasonably accurate facility- importers in order to develop a better
lower emission threshold alternatives
level emissions factors and the ability to understanding of the source of N2O
and one higher alternative. We collected
accurately measure all facility-level emissions from fertilizer use.
available data on each industry and
calculation variables at a reasonable cost For additional background
analyzed the implication of various
to reporters, facility-level emissions information on emissions from
thresholds in terms of number of
reporting would not improve our agricultural sources and other land use,
facilities and level of emissions covered
knowledge of GHG emissions relative to please refer to the TSD for Biological
at both the industry level and the
national or regional-level emissions Process Sources Excluded from this national level. We also performed a
models and data available from national Rule (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–045). similar analysis for each proposed
databases. While a systematic C. Rationale for Selection of Thresholds source category to determine if there
measurement program of these sources were reasons to develop a different
The proposed rule would establish
could improve understanding of the threshold in specific industry sectors.
reporting thresholds at the facility
environmental factors and management From these analyses, we concluded that
level.48 49 50 Only those facilities that
practices that influence emissions, this a 25,000 metric ton threshold suited the
type of measurement program is 48 Facilities reporting under this rule will likely needs of the reporting program by
technically difficult and expensive to have more than one source category within their providing comprehensive coverage of
implement, and would be better facility (e.g., a petroleum refinery would have to
accomplished through an empirical report on its refinery process, combustion, landfill than a single facility based on distinct and
and wastewater emissions). independent functional groupings within
research program that establishes and 49 For the purposes of this rule, facility means any contiguous military properties.
maintains rigorous measurements over physical property, plant, building, structure, source, 50 A different threshold approach is proposed for
time. or stationary equipment located on one or more vehicle and engine manufacturers (when reporting
Despite the issues associated with contiguous or adjacent properties in actual physical emissions from the vehicles and engines the
reporting by the agriculture and land contact or separated solely by a public roadway or produce). Here, EPA proposes to exempt small
other public right-of-way and under common businesses from reporting requirements, instead of
use sectors, threshold analyses were ownership or common control, that emits or may applying an emission-based threshold.
conducted for several source categories emit any greenhouse gas. Operators of military 51 To view a summary of EPA’s outreach efforts
within these sectors as part of their installations may classify such installations as more please refer to EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–055.
emissions with a reasonable number of We also considered 100,000 metric 25,000 metric tons CO2e), under the
reporters and that having a uniform tons of CO2e per year as an alternative CAA, there are (1) the Title V program
threshold was an equitable approach. threshold but concluded that it fails to that requires all major stationary
This conclusion took into account our satisfy two key objectives. First, it may sources, including all sources that emit
finding that a threshold other than exclude enough emitters in certain or have the potential to emit over 100
25,000 metric tons of CO2e might appear source categories such that the tons per year of an air pollutant, to hold
to achieve an appropriate balance emissions data would not adequately an operating permit 54 and (2) the PSD/
between number of facilities and cover key sectors of the economy. At NSR program that requires new major
emissions covered for a limited number 100,000 metric tons CO2e per year, sources and sources that are undergoing
of source categories. Our conclusions reporting for several large industry major modifications to obtain a permit.
about the alternative thresholds are sectors would be rather significantly A major source for PSD is defined as
summarized below and in the fragmented, resulting in an incomplete any source that emits or has the
Thresholds TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– picture of direct emissions from that potential to emit either 100 or 250 tons
0508–046), and the considerations for sector. For example, at a 100,000 metric per year of a regulated pollutant,
individual source categories are ton of CO2e threshold in ammonia dependent on the source category.55 In
explained in Section V of this preamble. manufacturing, approximately 22 out of nonattainment areas, the major source
The lower threshold alternatives that 24 facilities would have to report; in threshold for NSR is at most 100 tons
we considered were 1,000 metric tons of nitric acid production, approximately per year, and is less in some areas
CO2e per year, and 10,000 metric tons 40 out of 45 facilities would have to depending on the pollutant and the
of CO2e per year. Both broaden national report; in lime manufacturing, 52 out of nonattainment classification of the area.
emissions coverage but do so by 89 facilities would have to report; and EPA performed some preliminary
disproportionately increasing the in pulp and paper, 410 out of 425 analyses to generally estimate the
number of affected facilities (e.g., facilities would have to report. Several existing stock of major sources in order
increasing the number of reporters by an stakeholders we met with stressed this to then estimate the approximate
order of magnitude in the case of a 1,000 potential fragmentation as a concern number of new facilities that could be
metric tons CO2e/yr threshold and and requested that EPA include all required to obtain NSR/PSD permits.56
doubling the number of reporters in the facilities in a particular sector to For example, if the 100 and 250 tons per
case of a 10,000 metric tons CO2e/yr simplify compliance, even if there was year thresholds were applied in the
threshold). The majority of stakeholders some uncertainty about whether all context of GHGs, the Agency estimates
were opposed to these lower thresholds facilities in an industry would the number of PSD permits required to
for that reason—the gains in emissions technically meet a particular threshold. be issued each year would increase by
coverage are not adequately balanced For more information about the impact more than a factor of 10 (i.e., more than
against the increased number of affected of thresholds on different industries, 2,000 to 3,000 permits per year). The
facilities. please see the source-specific discussion additional permits would generally be
A 1,000 metric ton of CO2e per year in Section V of this preamble. issued to smaller industrial sources, as
threshold would increase the number of The data collected by this rulemaking well as large office and residential
affected facilities by an order of is intended to support analyses of future buildings, hotels, large retail
magnitude over the proposed threshold. policy options. Those options may establishments, and similar facilities.
The effect of a 1,000 metric ton depend on harmonization with State or For more information about the affect
threshold would be to change the focus even international reporting programs. of thresholds considered for this rule on
of the program from large to small Several States and regional GHG the number of reporters, emissions
emitters. This threshold would impose programs are using thresholds that are coverage and costs, please see Table
reporting costs on tens of thousands of comparable in scope to a 25,000 metric VIII–2 in Section VIII of this preamble
small businesses that in total would ton of CO2e per year threshold.53 As and Table IV–47 of the RIA found at
amount to less than 10 percent of noted earlier, California specifically EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–002.
national GHG emissions. chose a threshold of 25,000 metric ton Determining applicability to the rule.
A 10,000 metric ton of CO2e per year of CO2e after analyzing CO2 data from The thresholds listed in proposed 40
threshold approximately doubles the the air quality management districts CFR part 98, subpart A fall into three
number of facilities affected compared because they concluded that level groups: Capacity, emissions, or ‘‘all in.’’
to a 25,000 metric ton threshold. The provided the correct balance of The thresholds developed are generally
effect of a 10,000 metric ton threshold emissions coverage and number of equivalent to a threshold of 25,000
would only improve national emissions reporters. Implementing a national
metric tons of CO2e per year of actual
coverage by approximately 1 percent. reporting program using a 100,000,
emissions.
The extra data that would result from a 10,000 or 1,000 metric ton of CO2e per EPA carefully examined thresholds
10,000 metric ton threshold would do year limit would result in a fragmentary
and source categories that might be able
little to further the objectives of the dataset insufficient in detail or coverage,
program. EPA believes the 25,000 metric or a more burdensome reporting 54 Other sources required to obtain Title V
ton threshold more effectively targets requirement, and these options would operating permits include all sources that are
large industrial emitters, which are be inconsistent with what many other required to have PSD permits, ‘‘affected sources’’
responsible for some 90 percent of U.S. GHG programs are requiring today. under the ARP, and sources subject to NSPS or
In addition to the typical emissions NESHAP (although non-major sources under those
emissions. Similarly, California’s programs can be exempted by rule).
mandatory GHG reporting program also thresholds associated with GHG 55 The 100 tons per year level is the level at which
based their selection of a 25,000 metric reporting and reduction programs (e.g., existing sources in 28 industry categories listed in
the CAA are classified as major sources for the PSD
ton threshold on similar results at the 53 For more information about what different program. The 250 tons per year level is the level
State level.52 States are requiring, see section II of this preamble, at which existing sources in all other categories are
the ‘‘Summary of Existing State GHG Rules’’ classified as major sources for PSD purposes.
52 For more information on CA analysis please see memorandum and ‘‘Review of Existing Programs’’ 56 For more information about the major source
http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2007/ghg2007/ memorandum found at EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508– analysis please see docket number EPA–HQ–OAR–
isor.pdf. 056 and 054. 2008–0318.
to report utilizing a capacity metric, for emission metric accounts for actual and supplies coal would be subject to
example, tons of product produced per operating practices at each facility. A reporting as a supplier of coal (40 CFR
year. A capacity-based threshold could threshold based on potential emissions part 98, subpart KK), because coal
be the least burdensome alternative for would bring in far more facilities suppliers is an ‘‘all in’’ supplier
reporting because a facility would not including many small emitters. For category. But the company would
have to estimate emissions to determine example, under a potential emissions separately evaluate whether or not
if the rule applies. However, EPA faced threshold, a facility that operates one emissions from their underground coal
two key challenges in trying to develop shift a day would have to estimate mines (40 CFR part 98, subpart FF)
capacity thresholds. First, in most cases emissions assuming three shifts per day, would also be reported.
we did not have sufficient data to and would have to assume continuous In addition, the source categories
determine an appropriate capacity use of feedstocks or fuels that result in listed in proposed 40 CFR 98.2(a)(1) and
threshold. Secondly, for some source the highest rate of GHG emissions (2) and the supply operations listed in
categories defining the appropriate absent enforceable limitations. Such an proposed 40 CFR 98.2(a)(4) represent
capacity metric was not feasible. For approach would be inconsistent with EPA’s best estimate of the large emitters
example, for some source categories, the twin goals of collecting accurate of GHGs or large suppliers of fuel and
GHG emissions are not related to data on actual GHG emissions to the industrial GHGs. In order to ensure that
production capacity, but are more atmosphere and excluding small all large emitters are included in this
affected by design and operating factors. emitters from the rule. However, we reporting program, proposed 40 CFR
The scope of the proposed emission note that emissions thresholds in some 98.2(a)(3) also covers any facility that
threshold is emissions from all CAA rules are based on actual or emits more than 25,000 metric tons of
applicable source categories located potential emissions. Moreover, although CO2e per year from stationary fuel
within the physical boundary of a actual emissions may change year to combustion units at source categories
facility. To determine emissions to year due to fluctuations in the market that are not listed in proposed 40 CFR
compare to the threshold, a facility that and other factors, potential emissions 98.2(a)(2). To minimize the reporting
directly emits GHGs would estimate are less subject to yearly fluctuations. burden, such facilities would be
total emissions from all source We solicit comment on how required to submit an annual report that
categories for which emission considerations of actual and potential covers stationary combustion emissions.
estimation methods are provided in emissions should be incorporated into Furthermore, we recognize that a
proposed 40 CFR part 98, subparts C the proposed threshold. potentially large number of facilities
through JJ. The use of total emissions is There is one source category that has would need to calculate their emissions
necessary because some facilities are a proposed threshold based on GHG in order to determine whether or not
comprised of multiple process units or generation instead of emissions— they had to report under proposed 40
collocated source categories that municipal landfills. In this case, a GHG CFR 98.2(a)(3). Therefore, to further
individually may not be large emitters, generation threshold is more minimize the burden on those facilities,
but that emit significant levels of GHGs appropriate because some landfills have we are proposing that any facility that
collectively. The calculation of total installed CH4 gas recovery systems. A has an aggregate maximum rated heat
emissions for the purposes of gas recovery system collects a input capacity of the stationary fuel
determining whether a facility exceeds percentage of the generated CH4, and combustion units less than 30 mmBtu/
the threshold should not include destroys it, through flaring or use in hr may presume it has emissions below
biogenic CO2 emissions (e.g., those energy recovery equipment. The use of the threshold. According to our
resulting from combustion of biofuels). a threshold based on GHG generation analysis, a facility with stationary
Therefore, these emissions, while prior to recovery is proposed because it combustion units that have a maximum
accounted for and reported separately, ensures reporting from landfills that rated heat input capacity of less that 30
are not considered in a facility’s have similar CH4 emission generating mmBtu/hr, operating full time (e.g.,
emissions totals. activities (e.g., ensures that landfills of 8,760 hours per year) with all types of
In order to ensure that the reporting similar size and management practices fossil fuel would not exceed 25,000
of GHG emissions from all source are reporting). metric tons CO2e/yr (EPA–HQ–OAR–
categories within a facility’s boundaries As described in Section III of this
2008–0508–049). Under this approach,
is not unduly burdensome, EPA has preamble, in the case of 19 source
we estimate that approximately 30,000
proposed flexibility in two ways. First, categories all of the facilities that have
facilities would have to assess whether
a facility would only have to report on that particular source category within
or not they had to report according to
the source categories for which there are their boundaries would be subject to the
proposed 40 CFR 98.2(a)(3).57 Of the
methods provided in this rule. EPA has proposed rule. For these facilities, our
30,000, approximately 13,000 facilities
proposed methods only for source analysis indicated that all facilities with
would likely meet the threshold and
categories that typically contribute a that source category emit more than
have to report. Therefore, an additional
relatively significant amount to a 25,000 metric tons of CO2e per year or
17,000 facilities may have to assess their
facility’s total GHG emissions (e.g., EPA that only a few facilities emit marginally
has not provided a method for a facility below this level. These source categories applicability but potentially not meet
to account for the CH4 emissions from include large manufacturing operations the threshold for reporting. We
coal piles). Second, for small facilities, such as petroleum refineries and cement concluded that is a reasonable number
EPA has proposed simplified emission production. This simplifies the of assessments in order to ensure all
estimation methods where feasible (e.g., applicability determination for facilities 57 This estimate is based on the Energy and
stationary combustion equipment under with these source categories. Environmental Analysis, ‘‘Characterization of the
a certain rating can use a simplified When determining if a facility passes U.S. Industrial/Commercial Boiler Population’’
mass balance approach as opposed to a relevant applicability threshold, direct (2005) (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–050). We
more rigorous direct monitoring). emissions from the source categories assumed 3 boilers per manufacturing facility and 1
boiler per commercial facility. For additional
The proposed emissions threshold is would be assessed separately from the information on the impact to these 30,000 facilities,
based on actual emissions, with a few emissions from the supplier categories. please see the ICR and RIA (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–
exceptions described below. An actual For example, a company that produces 0508–002).
large emitters in the U.S. are included formally apply to EPA for an exemption estimates for future policy development.
in this reporting program. We are or if it is automatic, etc. Within each source category, further
seeking comment on (1) whether the EPA requests comment on the need breakout of emissions by process or unit
presumption for maximum rated heat for developing simplified emissions may be specified. Information on
input capacity of 30 mmBtu/hr is calculation tools for certain source process or unit-level reporting and
appropriate, (2) whether a different categories to assist potential reporters in associated rationale is contained in the
(lower or higher) mmBtu/hr capacity determining applicability. These source category sections within Section
presumption should be set and (3) simplified calculation tools would V of this preamble.
whether other capacity thresholds provide conservatively high emission Although many voluntary programs
should be developed for different types estimates as an aid in identifying such as Climate Leaders or TCR have
of facilities. The comments should facilities that could be subject to the corporate-level reporting systems, EPA
contain data and analysis to support the rule. Actual facility applicability would concluded that corporate-level reporting
use of different thresholds. be determined using the methods is overly complex under a mandatory
We are proposing that once a facility presented for each source category in system involving many reporters and
is subject to this reporting rule, it would the rule. thus is not appropriate for this rule,
continue to submit annual reports even For additional information about the except where discussed below. Complex
if it falls below the reporting thresholds threshold analysis EPA conducted see ownership structures and the frequent
in future years. (As discussed in section the Thresholds TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR– changes in ownership structure make it
IV.K. of this preamble, EPA is proposing 2008–0508–046) and the individual difficult to establish accountability over
that this rule require the submission of source category discussions in Section V time and ensure consistent and uniform
data into the foreseeable future, of this preamble. In addition, Section data collection at the facility-level.
although EPA is soliciting comment on V.QQ of this preamble describes the Because the best technical knowledge of
other options.) The purpose of the threshold for vehicle and engine emitting processes and emission levels
thresholds is to exclude small sources manufacturers, which is a different exists at the facility level, this is where
approach from what is described in this responsibility for reporting should be
from reporting. For sources that trigger
section. placed. Furthermore, the ability to
the thresholds, it is important for the
purpose of policy analysis to be able to D. Rationale for Selection of Level of differentiate and track the level and type
track trends in emissions and Reporting of emissions by facility, unit or process,
understand factors that influence EPA is proposing facility-level is essential for development of certain
emission levels. The data would be most reporting for most source categories types of future policy (e.g., NSPS).
useful if the population of reporting under this program. Specifically, the The only exception to facility level
sources is consistent, complete and not owner or operator of a facility would be reporting is for some supplier source
varying over time. required to report its GHG emissions categories (e.g., importers of fuels and
The one exception to the proposed from all source categories for which industrial GHGs or manufacturers of
requirement to continue submitting there are methods developed and listed motor vehicles and engines). Importers
reports even if a facility falls below the in this proposal. For example, a are not individual facilities in the
reporting threshold is active petroleum refinery would have to report traditional sense of the word. The type
underground coal mines. When coal is its emissions resulting from stationary of information reported by motor
no longer produced at a mine, the mine combustion, production processes, and vehicle and engine manufacturers is an
often becomes abandoned. As discussed any fugitive or biological emissions. extension of long-standing existing
in Section V.FF of this preamble, we are Facility-level reporting by owners or reporting requirements (e.g., reporting of
proposing to exclude abandoned coal operators is consistent with other CAA criteria emissions rates from vehicle and
mines from the proposed rule, and or State-level regulatory programs that engine manufacturers) and as such does
therefore methods are not proposed for typically require facility or unit level not necessitate a change in reporting
this source category. data and compliance (e.g., ARP, NSPS, level. The reporting level for these
We recognize that in some cases, this RGGI, and the California and New source categories is specified in Section
provision of ‘‘once in, always in’’ could Mexico mandatory GHG reporting V of this preamble.
potentially act as a disincentive for rules). This approach allows flexibility E. Rationale for Selecting the Reporting
some facilities to reduce their emissions for firms to determine whether the Year
because under this proposal those owner or operator of the facility would
facilities that did lower their emissions report and avoid the challenges of EPA is proposing that the monitoring
below the treshold would have to establishing complex reporting rules and reporting requirements would start
continue to report. To address this issue based on equity or operational control. on January 1, 2010.58 The first report to
in California, CARB’s mandatory In addition to reporting emissions at EPA would be submitted by March 31,
reporting rule offers a facility that has the total facility level, the emissions 2011, and would cover calendar year
emissions under the threshold for three would also be broken out by source 2010. The year 2011 is therefore referred
consecutive years the opportunity to be category (e.g., a petroleum refinery to as the first reporting year, and
exempt from the reporting program. We would separately identify its emissions includes 2010 data (there is a discussion
request comment on whether EPA for refinery production processes, later in this section that takes comment
should develop a similar process for this wastewater, onsite landfills, and any on alternative approaches to the
reporting program. Comments should other source categories listed in reporting year). EPA is requesting
include specifics on how the exemption proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart A that comment on whether or not we should
process could work, e.g., the number of are located onsite). This would enable select an alternative reporting date that
years a facility is under the threshold EPA to understand what types of
58 The exception is for vehicle and engine
before they could be exempt, the emission sources are being reported,
manufacturers when reporting emissions from the
quantity of emissions reductions determine that the facility is reporting vehicles and engines they produce. For these
required before a facility could be for all required source categories, and sources, reporting requirements would apply
exempt, whether a facility should use the source-category specific beginning with the 2011 model year.
corresponds with the requirements of an (e.g., flow meters, automatic data for 2010 they can substitute the data
existing reporting system. recorders), and in some cases already from their fuel receipts in the
For existing facilities that meet the installed. These same monitoring calculation). The disadvantage of this
applicability criteria in proposed 40 devices are already required by other air approach is that it delays full data
CFR part 98, subpart A, monitoring quality programs with which many of collection using the methods in the rule
would begin on January 1, 2010. For these same facilities are already by 1 year from what is proposed.
new facilities that begin operation after complying. Further, in some cases, this approach
January 1, 2010, monitoring would It is reasonable for new sources that could lead to data that is of lesser
begin with the first month that the start operation after January 1, 2010, to quality than the data we would receive
facility is operating and end on begin monitoring the first month of using the methods in 40 CFR part 98. In
December 31 of that same calendar year operation because new sources would other cases, because sources are already
in which they start operating. Each be aware of the rule requirements when following the methods in 40 CFR part 98
subsequent monitoring year would they design the facility and its processes (e.g., stationary combustion units in the
begin on January 1 and end on and obtain permits. They can plan the ARP), the quality of the data would
December 31 of each calendar year. EPA data collection and reporting processes remain unchanged under this option.
is proposing that new facilities monitor and install needed monitoring Given the objective of this rule to collect
and report emissions for the first partial equipment as they build the facility and comprehensive and accurate data to
year after they begin operating so that begin operating the monitoring inform future policies and the interest
EPA has as complete an inventory as equipment when they begin operating in Congress in developing climate
possible of GHG emissions for each the facility. change legislation, any delay in
calendar year. We recognize that although the receiving that data could adversely
Due to the comprehensive reporting Agency plans to issue the final rule in affect the ability to inform those
and monitoring requirements in this sufficient time to begin monitoring on policies. That said, the data we would
proposal, the Agency has concluded January 1, 2010, we may be unable to receive in 2011 under this option would
that it is not appropriate to require meet that goal. Therefore, we are at least provide basic information about
reporting of historical emissions data for interested in receiving comments on the types, locations, emissions and fuel
years before 2010. Compiling, alternative effective dates, including the consumption from facilities in the
submitting, and verifying historical data following two options: United States.
according to the methodologies • Report 2010 data in 2011 using best • Report 2011 data in 2012: Under
specified in this rule would create available data: Under this scenario, the this scenario, the rule would require
additional burdens on both the affected rule would be effective January 1, 2010, that affected facilities begin collecting
facilities and the Agency, and much of allowing affected facilities to use either data January 1, 2011 and submit the first
the needed data might not be available. the methods in proposed 40 CFR part 98 reports to EPA on March 31, 2012. The
Because Federal policy for GHG or best available data. As in the current methods in the proposed rule would
emissions is still being developed, the proposal, the report would be submitted remain unchanged and the only
Agency’s focus is on collecting data of on March 31, 2011, and then full data difference is that this option would
known quality that is generated on a collection, using the methods in 40 CFR delay implementation of the rule by one
consistent basis. Collecting historic part 98 would begin in 2011, with that year. The advantages of this approach
emissions data would introduce data of report sent to EPA on March 31, 2012. are that affected facilities would have a
unknown quality that would not be Under this approach, EPA solicits substantial amount of time to prepare
comparable to the data reported under comment on the types of best available for this reporting rule, including
the program for years 2011 and beyond. data and methods that should be implementing the method and installing
The first year of monitoring for allowed in 2010, by source category, equipment. In addition, we would have
existing facilities would begin on (e.g., fuel consumption, emissions by even more time to conduct outreach and
January 1, 2010. This schedule would process, default emissions factors, fuel guidance to affected facilities. The
give existing facilities lead time after the receipts, etc.) as well as additional basic disadvantages of this approach are that
date the rule is promulgated to prepare data that should be reported (e.g., it delays implementation of this rule by
for monitoring and reporting. facility name, location). This approach a year and does not offer a mechanism
Preparation would include studying the is similar to the CARB mandatory for EPA to receive crucial data, even
final rule, determining whether it reporting rule, which allowed affected basic data, necessary to inform future
applies to the facility, identifying the facilities to report 2009 emissions in policy and regulatory development.
requirements with which the facility 2010 using best available data, and then Furthermore, in some cases affected
must comply, and preparing to monitor requires 2010 data collection in 2011 facilities are already implementing the
and collect the required data needed to using the methods in the rule. The methods required by proposed 40 CFR
calculate and report GHG emissions. advantages of this approach are that the part 98 (e.g., stationary combustion
A beginning date of January 1, 2010 dates of the proposal remain intact and units in the ARP) or are familiar with
would allow sufficient time to begin EPA receives basic information, the methods, and have all of the
monitoring and collecting data because including emissions and fuel data from necessary equipment or processes in
many of the parameters that would need all affected facilities in 2011. place to monitor emissions consistent
to be monitored under the proposed rule Furthermore, this approach can ease with the methods in 40 CFR part 98.
are already monitored by facilities for facilities into the program by giving Therefore, delaying implementation by
process management and accounting them potentially a full year to a year not only deprives EPA of valuable
reasons (e.g., feedstock input rates, implement the required methods and data to support future policy
production output, fuel purchases). In install any necessary equipment. For development, but at the same time, does
addition, the monitoring methods example, this option encourages the use not provide any real advantage to these
specified by the rule are already well- of the methods in 40 CFR part 98 but if facilities.
known and documented; and that is not possible, it allows the use of Proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart A,
monitoring devices required by the rule best available data (e.g., if a facility does specifies numerical reporting thresholds
are routinely available, in ready supply not have a required flow meter installed for different direct emitters or supply
operations. A facility or supply no later than March 31 for the previous G. Rationale for the Emissions
operation that exceeds any of these calendar year’s reporting period. Three Information To Report
reporting thresholds in 2010 would months is a reasonable time to compile 1. General Content of Reports
submit a full emissions report in and review the information needed for
reporting year 2011, which contains the annual GHG emissions report and to Generally, we propose that facilities
calendar year 2010 data. The facilities prepare and submit the report. The data report emissions for all source
and supply operations that contain categories at the facility for which
needed to estimate emissions and
many of the source categories that are methods have been defined in any
compile the report would be collected
listed in 40 CFR part 98, subpart A are subpart of proposed 40 CFR part 98.
by the facility on an ongoing basis Facilities would report (1) total annual
larger facilities that have been
throughout the year, so facilities could GHG emissions in metric tons CO2e and
participating in a variety of mandatory
begin data summary during the year as (2) separately present annual mass
and voluntary GHG emissions programs.
Therefore, those facilities and supply the data are collected. For example, they emissions of each individual GHG for
operations should be familiar with the could compile needed GHG calculation each source category at the facility .59
methods and able to comply with the input data (e.g., fuel use or raw material Reporting of CO2e allows a comparison
requirements and submit a full report consumption data) or emission data on of total GHG emissions across facilities
without significant burden. a periodic basis (e.g., monthly or in varying categories which emit
As discussed earlier, if a facility does quarterly) throughout the year and then different GHGs. Knowledge of both
not have any of the source categories total it at the end of the year. Therefore, individual gases emitted and total CO2e
listed in proposed 40 CFR 98.2 (a)(1) or only the most recently collected emissions would be valuable for future
(2), but has stationary combustion onsite information would need to be compiled policy development and help EPA
that exceeds the GHG reporting and a final set of calculations would quantify the relative contribution of
threshold in 2010, they would still be need to be performed before the final each gas to a source category’s
required to estimate GHG emissions in report is assembled. Given the nature of emissions, while maintaining the
2010 and report in 2011. However, the methodologies contained in the rule, transparency of reporting total mass of
because those facilities would not three months is sufficient time to individual gases released by facility,
contain any of the source categories calculate emissions, quality-assure, unit, or process.
specifically identified in proposed 40 Emissions would be reported at the
certify, and submit the data. level (facility, process, unit) at which
CFR 98.2 (a)(1) or (2) and tend to be
smaller facilities in diverse industrial F. Rationale for Selecting the Frequency the emission calculation methods are
sectors, they may require some extra of Reporting specified in each applicable subpart. For
time to implement the requirements of example, if a pulp and paper mill has
this rule. As such, they would be EPA is proposing that all affected three boilers and a wastewater treatment
allowed to use an abbreviated facility facilities would have to submit annual operation, the facility would report
report using simplified emission GHG emission reports. Facilities with emissions for each boiler (according to
estimation methods for the first year ARP units that report CO2 emissions the methodologies presented in
(i.e., for calendar year 2010) and would data to EPA on a quarterly basis would proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C), the
not be required to complete a full report continue to submit quarterly reports as wastewater treatment operation
until the second reporting year (i.e., required by 40 CFR part 75, in addition (according to proposed 40 CFR part 98,
2012). to providing the annual GHG reports. subpart II), and from chemical recovery
The abbreviated report would allow The annual CO2 mass emissions from units, lime kilns, and makeup chemicals
the facility to use default fuel-specific the ARP reports would simply be (according to proposed 40 CFR part 98,
CO2 emission factors. They would not converted to metric tons and included subpart AA). In addition, the report
be required to determine actual fuel would include summary information on
in the GHG report. This approach
carbon content or to use a CEMS to certain process operating data that
should not impose a significant burden influence the level of emissions and that
determine CO2 emissions, as they may
on ARP sources. are necessary to calculate GHG
otherwise be required to do with a full
report. This provision for abbreviated We have determined that annual emissions and verify those calculations
reporting requirements has been reporting is sufficient for policy using the methodologies in the rule.
proposed because there are potentially development. It is consistent with other Examples of these data include fuel type
many facilities that are not in the listed existing mandatory and voluntary GHG and amount, raw material inputs, or
industries, but are required to report reporting programs at the State and production output. The specific process
solely due to stationary combustion Federal levels (e.g., TCR, several information to report varies for each
sources at their facility. These include individual State mandatory GHG source category and is specified in each
numerous and diverse sources in a wide reporting rules, EPA voluntary subpart.
variety of industries, some of which partnership programs, the DOE Furthermore, in addition to any
may not be as familiar with GHG specific requirements for reporting
voluntary GHG registry). However, as
monitoring and reporting. Such sources emissions from electricity generation in
future policies develop it may be
may often need more time to determine Sections V.C and V.D of this preamble,
necessary to reconsider the reporting EPA is proposing that all facilities and
if they are above the threshold and frequency and require more or less
subject to the rule and, if they are, to supply operations affected by this rule
frequent reporting (e.g., quarterly or would also report the quantity of
implement the full monitoring and
every few years). For example, under electricity generated onsite. The
reporting systems required. Therefore,
future programs or policy initiatives, generation of onsite electricity can
the abbreviated report with simpler
estimating methodologies is being particularly if regulatory in nature (e.g.,
proposed for these sources for the first a cap-and-trade program similar to the 59 Consistent with the IPCC, the CARB reporting
ARP) it may be more appropriate require rule and the EU Emission Trading System, the
year of monitoring and reporting. proposed rule requires units to separately report the
EPA proposes that the annual GHG quarterly reporting. biogenic portion of their total annual CO2
emissions reports would be submitted emissions.
represent a relatively significant fraction electricity purchase data, and not discussions in Section V of this
of onsite fuel use. We seek comment on indirect emissions, because these data preamble.
whether this information would be are more readily available to all
2. De minimis Reporting for Minor
useful to support future climate policy facilities. Through the review of existing
Emission Points
development, given the other data reporting programs that require the
related to GHG emissions from reporting of indirect emissions data it A number of existing GHG reporting
electricity generation already collected was determined that there are multiple programs contain ‘‘de minimis’’
under other sections of this proposed ways proposed to calculate indirect provisions. The goal of a de minimis
rule. At this point, we do not propose emissions from electricity purchases. provision is to avoid imposing excessive
separate reporting of the onsite This reflects the challenge associated reporting costs on minor emission
electricity generation by generation with determining the specific fossil fuel points that can be burdensome or
source (e.g., combined heat and power mix used to generate the electricity infeasible to monitor. Existing GHG
or renewable or fossil-based) due to the consumed by a facility, and thus the reporting programs recognize that it may
burden on reporters, but we recognize indirect emissions that should be not be possible or efficient to specify the
the potential value of being able to attributed to the facility. Although reporting methods for every source that
discern the quantity of electricity being indirect emissions data would not be must be reported and, therefore, have
generated from renewable and non- directly reported under this approach, it some type of provision to reduce the
renewable sources. We are seeking would enable indirect emissions for burden for smaller emissions sources.
comment on the value of collecting this facilities to be calculated. This option Depending on the program, the reporter
data; and if it is collected, whether there also would be the least burdensome to is allowed to either not report a subset
is a need to separately report the reporting facilities since the data would of emissions (e.g., 2 to 5 percent of
kilowatt-hours by type of generation be easily available. facility-level emissions) or use
source. The information that is proposed to be simplified calculation methods for de
We are also taking comment on, but reported reflects the data that could minimis sources.
not proposing at this time, requiring support analyses of GHG emissions for We analyzed the de minimis
facilities and supply operations affected future policy development and ensure provisions of existing reporting rules
by the proposed rule to also report the the data are accurate and comparable and concluded that there is no need to
quantity of electricity purchased. For across source categories. Besides total exclude a percentage of emissions from
many industrial facilities, purchased facility emissions, it benefits reporting under this proposal. EPA
electricity represents a large part of policymakers to understand: (1) The recognizes the potential burden of
onsite energy consumption, and their specific sources of the emissions and reporting emissions for smaller sources.
overall GHG emissions footprint when the amounts emitted by each unit/ The proposal addresses this concern in
taking into account the indirect process to effectively interpret the data, several ways. First, only those facilities
emissions from fossil fuel combusted for and (2) the effect of different processes, over the established thresholds would
the electricity generated. Together, the fuels, and feedstocks on emissions. This be required to report. Smaller facilities
reporting of electricity purchase data level of reporting should not be overly would not be subject to the program.
and onsite generation could provide a burdensome because many of these data Second, for those facilities subject to the
better understanding of how electricity already are routinely monitored and rule, only emissions from those source
is used in the economy and the major recorded by facilities for business categories for which methods are
industry sectors. reasons. The remainder of the reported provided would be reported. Methods
Many existing reporting programs data would need to be collected to are not proposed for what are typically
require reporting of indirect emissions determine GHG emissions. smaller sources of emissions (e.g., coal
(e.g., Climate Leaders, CARB, TCR, DOE The report would contain a signed piles on industrial sites). Third, because
1605(b) program). In general, the certification from a representative some facilities subject to the rule could
protocols for these programs follow the designated by the owner or operator of still have some relatively small sources,
methods developed by WRI/WBCSD for a facility affected by this rule. This the proposal includes simplified
the quantification and reporting of ‘‘Designated Representative’’ would act emissions estimation methods for
indirect emissions from the purchase of as a legal representative between the smaller sources, where appropriate. For
electricity. The WRI/WBCSD protocol source and the Agency. The use of the example, small stationary combustion
outlines three scopes to help delineate Designated Representative would units could use a default emission factor
direct and indirect emission sources, simplify the administration of the and heat rate to estimate emissions, and
with the stated goal to improve program while ensuring the no fuel measurements would be
transparency, and provide utility for accountability of an owner or operator required. Where simplified methods are
different types of organizations and for emission reports and other proposed, they are described in the
different types of climate policies and requirements of the mandatory GHG relevant discussions in Section V of this
business goals. Scope 1 includes direct reporting rule. The Designated preamble.
GHG emissions occurring from sources Representative would certify that data Our analysis showed that the GHG
that are owned or controlled by the submitted are complete, true, and reporting programs with de minimis
business. Scope 2 includes indirect accurate. The Designated Representative exclusions are structured differently
GHG emissions resulting from the could appoint an alternate to act on than our proposed rule. For example,
generation of purchased electricity, their behalf, but the Designated most rules with de minimis exclusions
heat, and/or steam. Scope 3 is optional Representative would maintain legal require corporate level reporting of all
and includes other types of indirect responsibility for the submission of emission sources. Under these
emissions (e.g., from production of complete, true, and accurate emissions programs, some corporations must
purchased materials, waste disposal or data and supplemental data. report emissions from numerous remote
employee transportation). Besides these general reporting facilities and must report emissions
We are taking comment on, but not requirements, the specific reporting from small onsite equipment (e.g., lawn
proposing at this time, an approach that requirements for each source category mowers). For these programs, a de
would require the reporting of are described in the methodological minimis exclusion avoids potentially
unreasonable reporting burdens. The a provision to require a minimum the relative accuracy and costs of
recent trend in these programs, standard for reported data (e.g., only 10 different approaches, the monitoring
however, is to require full reporting of percent of the data reported can be methods already in use within the
all required GHG emissions, but allow generated using missing data regulated industries, and consistency
simplified calculation procedures for procedures). with the monitoring approaches
small sources. In contrast to these other In addition to establishing procedures required by various Federal and State
reporting programs, today’s proposed for missing data, there may be benefit in mandatory and voluntary GHG reporting
rule would affect only larger facilities, requiring previously submitted data to programs. Measurement methods can
would require reporting of significant be recalculated in order to ensure that range from continuous direct emissions
emission points only, and would the GHG emissions reported by a facility measurements to simple calculation
contain simplified reporting where are as accurate as possible. The methods that rely on default factors and
practicable. Accordingly, a de minimis proposed California mandatory GHG assumptions. EPA considered four
exclusion is not necessary. EPA requests reporting program, for example, allows broad monitoring approaches for the
comment on whether this approach to reporters to revise submitted emissions mandatory GHG rule. These general
smaller sources of emissions is data if errors are identified, subject to approaches (options 1 through 4) and
appropriate or if we should include approval by the program. the rationale for the selected approach
some type of de minimis provision. EPA is considering whether or not to are described in this section. After a
For additional information on the include provisions to require facilities general approach was selected, EPA
treatment of de minimis in existing GHG to correct previously submitted data developed the specific proposed
reporting programs, please refer to the under certain circumstances. However, monitoring methods for each source
‘‘Reporting Methods for Small Emission these benefits must also be weighed category as described in Section V of
Points (De Minimis Reporting)’’ (EPA– against the additional costs associated this preamble.
HQ–OAR–2008–0508–048). with requiring reporters to recalculate Option 1. Direct Emission
and resubmit previous data, and the Measurement. Option 1 would require
3. Recalculation and Missing Data magnitude of the emissions changes direct measurement of GHGs for all
Most voluntary and mandatory GHG expected from such recalculations. source categories where direct
reporting programs include provisions Moreover, even if EPA were to allow measurement is feasible. It would
for operators to revise previously recalculation of submitted data or require installation of CEMS for CO2 in
submitted data. For example, some accept data submitted using missing the stacks from stationary combustion
voluntary programs require reporters to data procedures, that would not relieve units and industrial processes. The
revise their base year emissions the reporter of their obligation to report approach would be similar to 40 CFR
calculations if there is a significant data that are complete, accurate and in part 75 that require coal-fired EGUs to
change in the boundary of a reporter, a accordance with the requirements of install, operate, and maintain CEMs for
change in methodologies or input data, this rule. Although submitting SO2 and NOX emissions and report
a calculation error, or a combination of recalculated data or data using missing hourly emissions data (although some
the above that leads to a significant data procedures would correct the data lower-emitting units have the option to
change in emissions. Recalculation that are wrong, that resubmission or use fuel sampling and fuel flow rate
procedures particularly appear to be missing data procedures does not metering to determine emissions). Like
central in voluntary GHG reporting necessarily reverse the potential rule 40 CFR part 75, the direct measurement
programs that are also tracking violation and would not relieve the approach would have detailed
emissions reductions. reporter of any penalties associated with requirements for the CEMS including
Moreover, some programs (e.g., ARP) that violation. EPA is seeking comment stringent QA/QC requirements to
have detailed provisions for filling in on whether the mandatory GHG monitor accuracy and precision.
data gaps that are missing in the reporting program should include Direct measurement is not technically
required report. For example, in ARP, provisions to require reporters to submit feasible in all cases. For example, CEMS
these procedures apply when CEMS are recalculated data and under what are not available for many of the GHGs
not functioning and as a result several circumstances such recalculations that must be reported. Direct
hours of the required hourly data are should be required. measurement is also infeasible for
missing. Note, however, that merely emissions that are not captured and
filling in data gaps that are missing or H. Rationale for Monitoring
emitted through a stack, such as CH4
correcting calculation errors does not Requirements
emissions from the surface of landfills
relieve an operator from liability for In selecting the monitoring or fugitive emissions from selected oil
failure to properly calculate, monitor requirements for the proposed rule, and natural gas operations. For sources
and test as required. EPA’s goal is to collect data of sufficient where direct measurement is not
For this mandatory GHG reporting accuracy and quality to be used to technically feasible, this option would
program, EPA concluded it was inform future climate policy require the use of rigorous methods with
important to have missing data development and support a range of a comparable level of accuracy to CEMS.
procedures in order to ensure there is a possible policies and regulations. Future The direct measurement option has
complete report of emissions from a policies and regulations could range the highest degree of certainty of the
particular facility. However, because from research and development data reported. It is also the most costly
this program requires annual reporting initiatives to regulatory programs (e.g. , because all facilities where direct
rather than quarterly reporting of hourly cap-and-trade programs). Accurate and measurement is feasible would need to
data as in ARP, the missing data timely information is critical to making install, operate, and maintain emission
provision often require the facility to policy decisions and developing monitors. Most facilities currently do
redo the test or calculation of emissions. programs. However, EPA recognizes that not have CEMS to measure GHG
Section V of the preamble details the methods that provide the most accurate emissions.
missing data procedures for facilities data may also entail higher data Option 2. Combination of Direct
reporting to this program. EPA is collection costs. In selecting a general Emission Measurement and Facility-
seeking comment on whether to include monitoring approach, EPA considered Specific Calculations. This option
would require direct measurement of facilities are already calculating GHG Option 3 (simplified calculation
emissions from units at facilities that emissions to a higher degree of certainty methods) was not chosen because the
already are required to collect and for business reasons or for other data would be less accurate than option
report data using CEMS under other mandatory or voluntary reporting 2 and would not make use of site-
Federally enforceable programs (e.g., programs, and option 3 would not make specific data that many facilities already
ARP, NSPS, NESHAP, SIPs). In some use of such available data. However, the have available and refined calculation
cases, this may require upgrading cost to facilities is lower than under approaches that many facilities are
existing CEMS that currently monitor options 1 and 2. already using. Option 3 would also be
criteria pollutants to also monitor CO2. Option 4. Reporter’s Choice of inconsistent with several other GHG
Facilities that do not have units that Methods. Under this approach, reporters reporting programs such as TCR and
have CEMS installed would have the would have flexibility to select any California programs that contain more
choice to either directly measure measurement or calculation method and site-specific calculation methods for
emissions or to use facility-specific GHG any emission factors for determining several of the source categories.
calculation methods. The measurement emissions. The rule would not prescribe Option 4 (reporter’s choice of
and calculation methods for each source any methods or present any specific methods) was not proposed because the
category would be specified in each options for determining emissions. accuracy and reliability of the reported
subpart. Depending on the source Data collected under this option data would be unknown and would vary
category, methods could include mass would not be comparable across a given from one reporter to the next. Because
balance; measurement of the facility’s industry and across reporters subject to consistent methods would not be used
use of fuels, raw materials, or additives the program, thereby minimizing the under this option, the reported data
combined with site-specific measured usefulness of the data to support future would not be comparable across similar
carbon content of these materials; or policymaking. Although some facilities facilities. The lack of comparability
other procedures that rely on facility- might choose to use direct measurement would undermine the use of the data to
specific data. For the supplier source because CEMS are already installed at support policy decisions.
categories (e.g., those that supply fuels the facility, other facilities would select EPA requests comments on the
or industrial GHGs), this option would default calculations. This option would selected monitoring approach and on
require reporting of production, import, be the lowest cost to reporters. other potential options and their
and export data. The supplier advantages and disadvantages.
Proposed Option. For the proposed
companies already closely track these
rule, EPA selected option 2 I. Rationale for Selecting the
data for financial and other reasons.
This option provides a relatively high (combination of direct measurement and Recordkeeping Requirements
degree of certainty and takes advantage facility-specific calculations) as the
general monitoring approach. This EPA is proposing that each facility
of existing practices at facilities. This that would be required to submit an
option is less costly than option 1 option results in relatively high quality
data for use in developing climate annual GHG report would also keep the
because most facilities are not required following records, in addition to any
to install CEMS and can, in many cases, policies and supporting a wide range of
potential future policy options. Because records prescribed in each applicable
make use of data they are already subpart:
collecting for other reasons. we do not yet know which specific
policy options the data may ultimately • A list of all units, operations,
Option 3. Simplified Calculation processes and activities for which GHG
Methods. Under option 3, facilities be used to support, the reported GHG
emission estimates should have a emissions are calculated;
would calculate emissions using simple • The data used to calculate the GHG
inputs (e.g., total annual production) sufficient degree of certainty such that
emissions for each unit, operation,
that are usually already measured for they could be used to help develop a
process, and activity, categorized by fuel
other reasons, and EPA-supplied default potential variety of programs.
or material type;
emission factors (many of which have Option 2 strikes a balance between • Documentation of the process used
been developed by industry data accuracy and cost. It makes use of to collect the necessary data for the GHG
consortiums, such as the World existing data and methodologies to the emissions calculations;
Resources Institute/World Business extent feasible, and avoids the cost of • The GHG emissions calculations
Council for Sustainable Development installing and operating CEMS at and methods used;
(WRI/WBCSD) (Cement Sustainability numerous facilities. It is consistent with • All emission factors used for the
Initiative) Protocol). The default the types of methods contained in other GHG emissions calculations;
emission factors would represent GHG reporting programs (e.g., TCR, • Any facility operating data or
national average factors. These methods California programs, Climate Leaders). process information used for the GHG
and emission factors would not take Because this option specifies methods emissions calculations;
into account facility-specific differences for each source category, it should result • Names and documentation of key
in processes or in the composition of in data that are comparable across facility personnel involved in
raw materials, fuels, or products. facilities. calculating and reporting the GHG
Under this option, the only facilities Option 1 (direct emission emissions;
that would have to use more rigorous measurement) was not chosen because • The annual GHG emissions reports;
monitoring or site-specific calculations the cost to the reporters if all facilities • A log book documenting any
methods are facilities that are already had to install continuous emission procedural changes to the GHG
required to report emissions under 40 monitoring systems would be emissions accounting methods and any
CFR part 75. These facilities would unreasonably high in the absence of a changes to the instrumentation critical
continue to follow the CO2 monitoring defined policy that would require this to GHG emissions calculations;
and reporting requirements of 40 CFR type of monitoring. However, under the • Missing data computations;
part 75. selected option, facilities that already • A written QAPP;
Data collected under this option use CEMS would still be required to use • Any other data specified in any
would have a lower degree of certainty them for purposes of the GHG reporting applicable subpart of proposed 40 CFR
than options 1 or 2. Furthermore, many rule. part 98. Examples of such data could
include the results of sampling and other programs (e.g., offsets). detailed data needed to verify emissions
analysis procedures required by the Furthermore, many programs in the estimates. Such information would be
subparts (e.g., fuel heat content, carbon States and Regions may be broader in retained at the facility. For example,
content of raw materials, and flow rate) scope and the use of third party verifiers facilities would not be required to
and other data used to calculate may be appropriate to meet the needs of submit detailed monitoring data,
emissions. those programs. activity data (e.g., fuel use, raw material
These data are needed to verify the In addition, under the authorities of consumption, production rates), carbon
accuracy of reported GHG emission CAA sections 114 and 208, EPA has the content measurements, or emission
calculations and, if needed, to authority to independently conduct site factor data used to calculate emissions.
reproduce GHG emission estimates visits to observe monitoring procedures, Option 1 is a low burden option for
using the methods prescribed in the review records, and verify compliance reporters submitting data for this rule.
proposed rule. Since the above with this rule (see Section VII of this Reporters under this option would not
information must be collected in order preamble for further information on have to pay for third-party verifiers and
to calculate GHG emissions, the added compliance and enforcement). For would not necessarily have to submit
burden of maintaining records of that vehicle and engine manufacturers, EPA the additional data required under the
information should be minimal. is not proposing additional verification other options. In addition, EPA would
Each facility would be required to requirements beyond the current not incur the expense of conducting
retain all required records for at least 5 emissions testing and certification verification of the reported data or
years. Records would be maintained for procedures. These procedures include certifying independent verifiers to
this period so that a history of well-established methods for assuring conduct verification activities. The
compliance could be demonstrated and the completeness and quality of major disadvantages of this approach
questions about past emission estimates reported emission test data and EPA is are the greater potential for inconsistent
could be resolved, if needed. proposing to include the new GHG and inaccurate data in the absence of
The records would be required to be reporting requirements as part of these independent verification and the lower
kept in an electronic or hard-copy methods. level of confidence that the public,
format (as appropriate) that is readily stakeholders and EPA may have in the
2. Options Considered
accessible within a reasonable time for data.
onsite inspection and auditing. They In selecting this proposed approach to Option 2. Self-certification with third-
would be recorded in a form that can be verification, the Agency reviewed party verification. Under this approach,
easily inspected and reviewed. The verification requirements and reporters would submit the same self-
allowance of a variety of electronic and procedures under a number of existing certification statements as under option
hard copy formats for records allows EPA regulatory programs, as well as 1. In addition, reporters would be
flexibility for facilities to use a system existing domestic and international required to hire independent third-party
GHG reporting programs. Additional verifiers. The third-party verifiers would
that meets their needs and is consistent
information on this review and the review the emissions report and the
with other facility records maintenance
verification approaches can be found in underlying monitoring system records,
practices, thereby minimizing the
a technical memorandum (‘‘Review of activity data collection, calculation
recordkeeping burden.
Verification Systems in Environmental procedures, and documentation, and
J. Rationale for Verification Reporting Programs,’’ EPA–HQ–OAR– submit a verification statement that the
Requirements 2008–0508–047). Based on this review, reported emissions are accurate and free
EPA considered three alternative of material misstatement. Under this
1. General Approach to Verification
approaches to verification: (1) Self- approach, records supporting the GHG
Proposed in This Rule
certification without independent emissions calculations would be
GHG emissions reported under this verification, (2) self-certification with retained at the facility for compliance
rule would be verified to ensure third-party verification, and (3) self- purposes and provided to the verifiers,
accuracy and completeness so that EPA certification with EPA verification. but not submitted to EPA. In addition,
and the public could be confident in Option 1. Self-certification without as discussed below, EPA would have to
using the data for developing climate independent verification. Under this establish a system to certify the
policies and potential future option, the Designated Representative of independent verifiers.
regulations. To ensure the completeness the reporting facility would be required Self-certification with third-party
and quality of data reported to the to sign and submit a certification verification provides greater assurance
program, the Agency proposes self- statement as part of each annual of accuracy and impartiality than self-
certification with EPA verification. emissions report. The certification certification without verification. While
Under this approach, all reporters would affirm that the report has been this option is consistent with some
subject to this rule would certify that prepared in accordance with the existing domestic and international
the information they submit to EPA is requirements of the GHG reporting rule, GHG reporting programs such as TCR,
truthful, accurate and complete. EPA and that the emissions data and other the California mandatory reporting rule,
would then review the emissions data information reported is true and CCAR, and the EU Emission Trading
and supporting data submitted by accurate to the best knowledge and System, the majority of industry
reporters to verify that the GHG belief of the certifying official. The stakeholders that met with EPA are
emission reports are complete, accurate, reasons for requiring self-certification opposed to this approach for this
and meet the reporting requirements of are contained in Section IV.G of this rulemaking, primarily due to the
this rule. preamble. Under option 1, EPA would additional cost. Compared to option 1,
Given the scope of this rulemaking, not independently verify the accuracy the third-party verification approach
this approach is consistent with many and consistency of the reported data. places two additional costs on reporters:
EPA regulatory programs. That said, this Furthermore, because this approach (1) Reporters would need to hire and
proposal does not preclude that in the does not include independent pay verifiers, at a cost of thousands of
future, as climate policies evolve, EPA verification by EPA or a third party, the dollars per reporting facility, and (2)
may consider third party verification for facility would not have to submit the reporters would incur costs to assemble
and provide to verifiers detailed verification program would result in third-party verification approach could
supporting data for the emission greater costs to the Agency than options entail a risk of inconsistent verifications
estimates. 1 and 2, but due to economies of scale because verification responsibilities are
To ensure consistency and quality of may result in lower overall costs. spread amongst numerous verifiers.
the third-party verifications, EPA would Given the potential diversity of verifiers,
need to develop verification protocols, 3. Selection of Self-Certification With
the quality and thoroughness of
EPA Verification as the Proposed
establish a system to qualify and verifications may be inconsistent and
Approach
accredit the third-party verifiers, and EPA audit and enforcement oversight
conduct ongoing oversight and auditing EPA is proposing self-certification would become the predominant factor
of verifications to be sure that third- with EPA verification (option 3) because in ensuring uniformity. Under option 2,
party verifications continue to be it ensures that data reported under this EPA would also need to develop and
conducted in a consistent and high rule are consistent, accurate, and administer a process to ensure that
quality manner. complete. In addition, we are seeking verifiers hired by the reporting facilities
As mentioned above, as climate comment on requiring third-party do not have conflicts of interest. Such
policy evolves, it may be appropriate for verification for suppliers of petroleum a program could require EPA to review
EPA to consider the use of third party products, many of whom currently numerous individual conflict of interest
verification in other circumstances (e.g., report to EPA under the Office of screening determinations made each
offsets). Transportation and Air Quality’s fuels time a reporter hires a third-party
Option 3. Self-certification with EPA programs. Third-party verification could verifier. Finally, EPA verification would
verification. Under this option, reporters be reasonable in these instances because likely avoid any delays that may be
would submit the same self-certification this rule, to some extent, would build introduced by third-party verification
as under option 1. Reporters also would on existing transportation fuels and better ensure the timely reporting
assemble data to support their emissions programs that already require audits of and use of the reported data. Some
estimates, similar to option 2 but submit records maintained by these suppliers reporting programs provide four to six
it to EPA in their annual emission by independent certified public months after the annual emissions
reports, rather than to a third party accountants or certified internal report is submitted for third-party
verifier. EPA would review the auditors. For more information about verification. That said, as mentioned
emissions estimates and the supporting the approach to fuel suppliers please above, depending on the scope or type
data contained in the reports, and refer to Section V of this preamble. of program (e.g., offsets), EPA may
perform other activities (e.g., EPA is successfully using self consider the use of third party
comparison of data across similar certification with EPA verification in a verification in the future as policy
facilities, site visits) to verify that the number of other emissions reporting options evolve.
reported emissions data are accurate programs. EPA verification option The Agency recognizes that, in some
and complete. provides greater assurance of the instances, data submitted by reporters
EPA verification provides greater accuracy, completeness, and under this rule may have been
assurance of accuracy and impartiality consistency of the reported data than independently verified as the result of
than self-reporting without verification. option 1 (no independent verification) other mandatory or voluntary GHG
Compared to a third-party verification and consistent with feedback from reporting programs or by other Federal,
system, there would be a consistent industry stakeholders, does not require State or local regulations. Whether or
approach to verification from one reporters to hire third-party verifiers not data have been independently
centralized verifier rather than a variety (option 2). In addition, EPA verification verified outside of the requirements of
of separate verifiers although this option option does not require the this proposed GHG reporting rule, EPA
would require EPA to ensure establishment of an accreditation and has concluded for the purposes of this
consistency if it chose to use its own approval program for third-party proposal it is important to apply the
contractors to support its verification verifiers although it would require EPA same verification requirements to all
activities. In addition, a centralized to ensure consistency if it chose to use affected facilities in order to ensure
verification system would provide its own contractors to support its equity across all reporters and
greater ability to the government to verification activities. consistent data collection for policy
identify trends and outliers in data and EPA judged that option 1 (no analysis and public information.
thus assist with targeted enforcement independent verification) does not
ensure sufficient quality data for the K. Rationale for Selection of Duration of
planning. Finally, an EPA verification the Program
approach is consistent with other EPA possible future uses of the data. The
emissions reporting programs including potential inconsistency, inaccuracy, and EPA is proposing that the rule require
EPA’s ARP.60 The cost to the reporter is increased uncertainty of the data the reporting of GHG emissions data on
intermediate between options 1 and 2. collected under option 1 would make an ongoing, annual basis. Other
Although this approach would not the data less useful for informing approaches that EPA considered include
subject reporters to the cost of paying decisions on climate policy and a one-time collection of information and
for third-party verifiers, reporters would supporting the development of a wide collection of a limited duration (e.g., a
have to assemble and submit detailed range of potential future policies and three-year data collection effort).
regulations. EPA does not believe that a one-time
supporting data to ensure proper
We selected EPA verification (option data collection effort is consistent with
verification by EPA. An EPA
3) instead of third-party verification the legislative history of the FY 2008
60 For a description of how verification is (option 2) because EPA verification is Consolidated Appropriations Act,
conducted in ARP please see, ‘‘Fundamentals of consistent with other EPA programs, has which instructed EPA to develop a rule
Successful Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification lower costs to reporters than option 2, to require the reporting of GHG
under a Cap-and-Trade Program.’’ John and would result in a consistent emissions. Typically, a rule is not
Schakenbach, Robert Vollaro, and Reynaldo Forte,
U.S. EPA/OAP. Journal of the Air and Waste
verification approach applied to all required to undertake a one-time
Management Association 56:1576–1583. November submitted data. Even with a verifier information collection request.
2006. (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–051.) accreditation and approval process, the Moreover, the President’s FY 2010
Budget, as well as initial Congressional information for one or more source to aid facilities in identifying potentially
budgets for the remainder of FY 2009 categories is no longer relevant to relevant source categories. The cross-
indicate that policy makers anticipate decision-making, or is adequately walk table should only be seen as a
that the information will be collected for provided in the context of regulatory guide as to the types of source categories
multiple years. program (e.g., CAA NSPS). Notably, that may be present in any given facility
For example, on February 6, 2009, EPA crafted the requirements in this and therefore the methodological
Senators Feinstein, Boxer, Snowe and rule with the potential monitoring, guidance in Section V of this preamble
Klobuchar sent a letter to EPA’s recordkeeping and reporting that should be reviewed. Additional
Administrator Lisa Jackson and OMB’s requirements for any future regulations source categories (beyond those listed in
Director Peter Orszag stating that this addressing GHG emissions in mind. Table 2 of this preamble) may be
program allowed EPA to ‘‘gather critical EPA solicits comment on all of these relevant to a given reporter. Similarly,
baseline data on greenhouse gas possible approaches, including whether not all listed source categories would be
emissions, which is essential EPA should commit to revisit the relevant to all reporters. The remainder
information that policymakers need to continued necessity of the reporting of this overview summarizes the general
craft an effective climate change program at a future date. approach to calculating and reporting
approach.’’ In addition, in recent these downstream sources of emissions.
testimony from John Stephenson, V. Rationale for the Reporting,
Recordkeeping and Verification Consistent with the requirements in
Director of Natural Resources and the proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart A,
Environment at the Government Requirements for Specific Source
Categories facilities would have to report GHG
Accountability Office,61 stated that emissions from all source categories
when setting baselines for past Section V of this preamble discusses located at their facility—stationary
regulatory policies, averaging data the source categories covered by the combustion, process (e.g., iron and
‘‘across several years also helped to proposed rule. Each section presents a steel), fugitive (e.g., oil and gas) or
ensure that the baseline reflected description of a source category and the biologic (e.g., landfills) sources of GHG
changes in emissions that can result in proposed threshold, monitoring
emissions. The methods presented
a given year due to economic and other methods, missing data procedures, and
typically account for normal operating
conditions.’’ The testimony further reporting and recordkeeping
conditions, as well as SSM, where
noted the because EPA’s ARP was able requirements.
significant (e.g., HCFC–22 production
to average several years worth of data A. Overview of Reporting for Specific and oil and gas systems). Although SSM
when setting the baseline for SO2 Source Categories is not specifically addressed for many
reductions, the program ‘‘achieved source categories, emissions estimation
greater assurances that it reduced Once you have determined that your
facility exceeds any reporting threshold methodologies relying on CEMS or mass
emissions from historical levels’’ as balance approaches would capture these
opposed to the EU who did not have specified in 40 CFR 98.2(a), you would
have to calculate and report GHG different operating conditions.
enough data to set accurate baselines for
emissions, or alternate information as For many facilities, calculating
the first phase of the EU Emissions
required (e.g., production and imports facility-wide emissions would simply
Trading System. Furthermore, EPA’s
for industrial GHG suppliers) for all involve adding GHG emissions
experience with certain CAA programs
source categories at your facility for calculated under Section V.C of this
show that a one-time snapshot of
information is not always representative which there are measurement methods preamble (General Stationary Fuel
of normal operations, and hence provided. The threshold determination Combustion Sources) and emissions
emissions, of a facility. See, e.g., Final is separately assessed for suppliers calculated under the source-specific
New Source Review (NSR) Reform (fossil fuel suppliers and industrial GHG subpart. For other facilities, particularly
Rules, 68 FR 80186, 80199 (2002). suppliers) and downstream source selected sources in Sections V.E through
Finally, as discussed earlier, a multi- categories. V.JJ of this preamble that rely on mass
year reporting program allows EPA to Facilities, or corporations, where balance approaches or the use of CEMS,
track trends in emissions and relevant, that trigger only the threshold the proposed methods would
understand factors that influence for upstream fossil fuel or industrial (depending on the operating conditions
emissions levels. GHG supply (proposed 40 CFR part 98, and configuration of the plant) capture
EPA also considered a multi-year subparts KK through PP) need only both combustion and process-related
program that would sunset at a date follow the methods in those respective emissions and there is no need to
certain in the future (e.g., three years) sections. Facilities (or corporations) that separately quantify combustion-related
absent subsequent regulatory action by contain source categories that also have emissions using the methods presented
EPA to extend it. EPA decided against downstream sources of emissions (e.g., in Section V.C of this preamble.
this approach because it would proposed 40 CFR part 98, subparts B Generally, the proposed method
unnecessarily limit the debate about through JJ), or facilities that are depends on the equipment you
potential policy options to address exclusively downstream sources of currently have installed at the facility.
climate change. At this time, it would be emissions may have to monitor and Sources with CEMS. If you have
premature to guess at what point in the report GHG emissions using methods CEMS that meet the requirements in
future this information may be less presented in multiple sections. For proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C you
relevant to decision-making. Rather, a example, a food processing facility would be required to quantify and
more prudent approach is to maintain should review Section V.C (General report the CO2 emissions that can be
the program until such time in the Stationary Fuel Combustion), Section monitored using the existing CEMS.
future when it is determined that the V.HH (Landfills) and Section V.II Non-CO2 combustion-related emissions
(Wastewater Treatment) in addition to would be estimated consistent with
61 High Quality Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data
Section V.M (Food Processing) of this proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C, and
are a Cornerstone of Programs to Address Climate preamble. Table 2 of this preamble (in other non-CO2 emissions would be
Change, Statement of John Stephenson, Director,
Natural Resources and Environment, Government the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section estimated using the source-specific
Accountability Office, February 24, 2009. of this preamble) provides a cross walk methods provided.
(1) Where the CEMS capture both and the efficiency of this use indirectly No additional facilities to those
combustion- and process-related affect the emissions of CO2, CH4 and already reporting their emissions data
emissions you would be required to N2O from the combustion of fossil fuel under this rule would be affected by the
follow the calculation procedures, at electric generating stations. first or second options. The number of
monitoring and QA/QC methods, For many facilities, purchased additional facilities affected by the third
missing data procedures, reporting electricity represents a large part of proposed threshold is estimated to be
requirements, and recordkeeping onsite energy consumption, and their approximately: 250 facilities at a
requirements of proposed 40 CFR part overall GHG emissions footprint when 100,000 metric tons CO2e threshold;
98, subpart C to estimate emissions from taking into account the indirect 5,000 total facilities at a 25,000 metric
the industrial source. In this case, use of emissions from fossil fuel combusted for tons CO2e threshold; 15,000 total
the additional methods provided in the the electricity generated. Therefore, the facilities at a 10,000 metric tons CO2e
source-specific discussions would not reporting of electricity purchase data threshold; and 185,000 total facilities at
be required. from facilities could provide a better a 1,000 metric tons CO2e threshold.
(2) Where the CEMS do not capture understanding of how electricity is used Under all threshold options, reporting
both combustion and process-related in the economy and the major sectors. of information related to electricity
emissions, you should refer to the We would propose not to provide for purchases would apply to entities
source-specific sections that provide adjustments to take into account the reporting at the facility level. This
methods for calculating process purchases of renewable energy credits provision would not apply to source
emissions. You would also be required or other mechanisms. categories that we propose report at the
to follow the calculation procedures, If included, this source category corporate level (e.g., importers and
monitoring and QA/QC methods, would include electricity purchases, but exporters of industrial GHGs, local
missing data procedures, reporting not include electricity generated onsite distribution companies, etc.). These
requirements, and recordkeeping (i.e., facility-operated power plants, companies in many cases may own large
requirements of proposed 40 CFR part emergency back-up generators, or any facilities such as refineries which
98, subpart C to estimate any stationary portable, temporary, or other process already have a reporting obligation for
fuel combustion emissions from the internal combustion engines). General direct emissions and electricity
industrial source. requirements for all reporters subject to purchases.
Sources without CEMS. If you do not the proposed rule to report on total Given the above considerations, our
have CEMS that meet the requirements kilowatt hours of electricity generated preferred option would be option 2.
outlined in proposed 40 CFR part 98, onsite is discussed in Section IV.G of Purchased electricity is considered to be
subpart C, you would be required to the preamble. Calculating emissions a significant portion of the GHG
carry out facility-specific calculations to from onsite electricity generation is emissions of most industrial facilities,
estimate process emissions. You would addressed in Sections V.C and V.D of therefore the collection of indirect
also be required to follow the this preamble. emissions from purchased electricity
calculation procedures, monitoring and For additional background could be seen as an important
QA/QC methods, missing data information on indirect emissions from component of the GHG mandatory
procedures, reporting requirements, and electricity purchases, please refer to the reporting rule. Although such a
recordkeeping requirements of proposed Electricity Purchases TSD (EPA–HQ– reporting requirement would not
40 CFR part 98, subpart C to estimate OAR–2008–0508–003). provide EPA with emissions
any stationary fuel combustion information, it could provide the
2. Selection of Reporting Threshold necessary underlying data to develop
emissions from the industrial source.
Three options for reporting thresholds emissions estimates in the future if this
B. Electricity Purchases could be considered for the reporting of were necessary.
At this time, we are not proposing indirect emissions from purchased The reporting of electricity purchase
that facilities report information to us electricity (i.e., GHG emissions from the data directly instead of calculated
regarding their electricity purchases or production of purchased electricity). indirect emissions would be preferred
indirect emissions from electricity These options would be as follows: due to the difficulties in identifying the
consumption. However, we carefully Option 1: Do not require any reporting appropriate electrical grid or electrical
considered proposing that all facilities on electricity purchases or associated plant emission factor for converting a
that report to us also report their total indirect emissions from electricity facility’s electricity purchases to GHG
purchases of electricity. This section purchases as part of this rule. emissions. EPA does not have data to
describes our deliberations and outlines Option 2: Require reporting on evaluate the uncertainty of applying
potential methods for monitoring and purchased electricity from all facilities national, regional or State emission
reporting electricity purchases. We that are already required to report their factors to electricity consumption at a
generally seek comment on the value of GHG emissions under this rule. given facility, versus undertaking
collecting information on electricity Option 3: Require reporting of detailed studies to determine the actual
purchases. Further, we are specifically indirect emissions from purchased emissions from electricity purchases.
interested in receiving feedback on the electricity for facilities that exceed a Under Option 2, all facilities that are
approach outlined below. prescribed total facility emissions already required to report their GHG
threshold (including indirect emissions emissions under this rule would also
1. Definition of the Source Category from the purchased electricity). have to quantify and report their annual
The electric utility sector is the largest Reporting for this option could be electricity purchases. The total
emitter of GHG emissions in the U.S. proposed either in terms of electricity purchased electricity would include
The level of GHG emissions associated purchases or calculated indirect CO2e electricity purchased from all sources
with electricity use is determined not emissions based on purchased (i.e., fossil fuel power plants, green
just by the fuel and combustion electricity. This option would require an power generating facilities, etc.). It
technology onsite at the power plant, additional number of reporters, based should be noted that under this
but also by customer demand for on their annual electricity purchases, to approach, data from large sources of
electricity. Accordingly, electricity use report indirect emissions. indirect emissions due to electricity
usage (e.g., non-industrial commercial 5. Selection of Data Reporting the CH4 and N2O emissions (CH4 and
buildings) would be not be collected. Requirements N2O contribute less than 1 percent of
If we were to collect information on combined U.S. GHG emissions from
3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring stationary combustion, on a CO2e basis),
Methods electricity purchases, we would propose
that a facility report total annual however, under this proposed rule, CO2,
Purchased electricity could be purchased electricity in kilowatt-hours CH4, and N2O would all be reported by
quantified through the use of purchase for the entire facility. stationary fuel combustion sources. EPA
receipts or similar records provided by is proposing to not require reporting of
6. Selection of Records That Must Be emissions from portable equipment or
the electricity provider. The facility
Retained generating units designated as
could choose to use data from facility
maintained electric meters in addition If we were to collect information on emergency generators in a permit issued
to or in lieu of data from an electricity electricity purchases, we would propose by a state or local air pollution control
provider (e.g., electricity purchase that the owner or operator maintain agency. We request comment on
receipts, etc.), provided that this data monthly electricity purchase records for whether or not a permit should be
could be demonstrated to accurately all operations and buildings. If electric required for these emergency generators.
reflect facility electricity purchases. meter data were used, then monthly logs A wide and diverse segment of the
However, purchase receipts or of the electric meter readings would also U.S. economy engages in stationary
electricity provider data would be the be proposed to be maintained. combustion, principally the combustion
preferred method of quantifying a of fossil fuels. According to the
C. General Stationary Fuel Combustion
facility’s electricity purchases. Because ‘‘Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas
Sources
facilities would be expected to retain Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2006’’, the
these data as part of routine financial 1. Definition of the Source Category nationwide GHG emissions from
records, the only additional burden of Stationary fuel combustion sources stationary fossil fuel combustion are
collecting this information would be to are devices that combust solid, liquid, approximately 3.75 billion metric tons
retain the records in a readily available or gaseous fuel generally for the CO2e per year. This estimate includes
manner. purposes of producing electricity, both large and small stationary sources
generating steam, or providing useful and represents more than 50 percent of
In identifying the options outlined total GHG emissions in the U.S.
above, we reviewed five reporting heat or energy for industrial,
commercial, or institutional use, or EPA’s proposed rule presents
programs and guidelines: (1) EPA methods for calculating GHG emissions
Climate Leaders Program, (2) the CARB reducing the volume of waste by
removing combustible matter. from stationary combustion, both at
Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Emissions unspecified facilities as well as facilities
Program, (3) TRI, (4) the DOE 1605(b) Stationary fuel combustion sources
include, but are not limited to, boilers, in source categories listed in proposed
program, and (5) the GHG Protocol 40 CFR 98.2(a)(1) and (2), which are
developed jointly by WRI and WBCSD. combustion turbines, engines,
incinerators, and process heaters. The based on the fuel combusted and the
In general, these protocols follow the size of the stationary equipment (e.g.,
methods presented in WRI/WBCSD for combustion process may be used to: (a)
Generate steam or produce useful heat the maximum heat input capacity in
the quantification and reporting of mmBtu/hr). EPA already collects CO2
indirect emissions from the purchase of or energy for industrial, commercial, or
institutional use; (b) produce electricity; emissions data from electricity
electricity. generating units in the ARP,62 which
or (c) reduce the volume of waste by
See the Electricity Purchases TSD removing combustible matter. As combust the vast majority of coal
(EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–003) for discussed in Section III of this preamble consumed in the U.S. annually. So,
more information. and proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart while detailed requirements are
A, this section applies to facilities with provided for facilities that combust
4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating solid fuels, these methods are likely to
Missing Data stationary fuel combustion sources that
(a) have emissions greater than or equal affect only a small percentage of
If we were to collect information on to 25,000 metric tons CO2e/yr; or (b) are facilities reporting under proposed 40
electricity purchases, we would propose referred to this section by other source CFR part 98 (as separate methods, in
that a facility be required to make all categories listed in proposed 40 CFR proposed 40 CFR 98.40, would be used
attempts to collect electricity records 98.2(a)(1) or (2). by electricity generating units already
from their electricity provider. In the Combustion of fossil fuels in the U.S. reporting under the requirements of
event that there were missing electricity is the largest source of GHG emissions ARP). In presenting methodologies in
purchase records, the facility would in the nation, producing three principal the following sections, EPA further
estimate its electricity purchases for the greenhouse gases: CO2, CH4 and N2O. notes that the majority of reporters
missing data period based on historical For the purposes of this rule, CO2, CH4, under proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart
data (i.e., previous electricity purchase and N2O would be reported by C would use the methods prescribed for
records). Any historical data used to stationary fuel combustion sources. The stationary combustion equipment
estimate missing data should represent emission rate of CO2 is directly combusting natural gas.
similar circumstances to the period over proportional to the carbon content of the Table C–1 of this preamble illustrates
which data are missing (e.g., seasonal). fuel, and virtually all of the carbon is the methods for calculating CO2
If a facility were using electric meter oxidized to CO2. The emission rates of emissions for different types of reporters
data and had a missing data period, the CH4 and N2O are much less predictable, based on the fuel being combusted at
facility could use a substitute data value as these gases are by-products of the facility and the size of the stationary
developed by averaging the quality- incomplete or inefficient combustion, combustion equipment. The
assured values metered values for and depend on many factors such as 62 It should be noted, as discussed in section V.D,
kilowatt-hours of electricity use combustion technology and other EPA already collects over 90% of total CO2
immediately before and immediately considerations. The CO2 emissions emissions from U.S. coal combustion through the
after the missing data period. generated by fuel combustion far exceed 40 CFR part 75 requirements of ARP.
calculations for CH4 and N2O that are not contingent upon the stationary
presented in subsequent subsections are cobustion equipment size.
to be applied to all fuel types and are
TABLE C–1. FOUR-TIERED APPROACH FOR CALCULATING CO2 EMISSIONS FROM STATIONARY COMBUSTION SOURCES
Methodological
Combustion unit size Additional requirement(s) tier
required a
Solid Fossil Fuel (e.g., Coal)
> 250 mmBtu/hour ................................... —Unit has operated more than 1,000 hours a year b ............................................... 4
—Unit has existing, certified gas monitors or stack gas volumetric flow rate mon-
itor (or both); and
—Facility has an established monitoring infrastructure and meets specific QA/QC
requirements.
—Unit does not meet conditions above .................................................................... 3
≤ 250 mmBtu/hr ....................................... —Unit operates more than 1,000 hours a year b ...................................................... 4
—Unit has existing, certified CO2 or O2 concentration monitor and stack gas volu-
metric flow rate monitor; and
requirements.
—Monthly measured HHV is available.
—Monthly measured HHV is not available.
Gaseous Fossil Fuel (e.g., Natural Gas)
> 250 mmBtu/hr ....................................... None .......................................................................................................................... 3

≤ 250 mmBtu/hr ....................................... —Monthly measured HHV is available ..................................................................... 2
—Monthly measured HHV is not available ............................................................... 1
Fossil Liquid Fuel (e.g., Diesel)
> 250 mmBtu/hr ....................................... None .......................................................................................................................... 3

≤ 250 mmBtu/hr ....................................... —Monthly measured HHV is available ..................................................................... 2
—Monthly measured HHV is not available ............................................................... 1
Biomass or Biomass-Derived Fuels (e.g., wood)
All Sizes ................................................... —EPA has provided a default CO2 emission factor and a default heating value for 1
the fuel.
All Sizes ................................................... —EPA has provided a default CO2 emission factor for specific fuel to be used 2
with that fuel’s measured heating value.
All Sizes ................................................... —EPA has not provided a default CO2 emission factor for specific fuel to be used 3
with that fuel’s measured heating value.
MSW
> 250 tons MSW/day ............................... —Unit has operated more than 1,000 hours a year b ............................................... 4
—Unit has existing, certified gas monitors or stack gas volumetric flow rate mon-
itor (or both); and
requirements.
≤ 250 tons MSW/day ............................... —Unit operates more than 1,000 hours a year b ...................................................... 4
—Unit has existing, certified CO2 concentration monitor and stack gas volumetric
flow rate monitor; and
requirements.
a Minimum tier level to be used by reporters. Reporters required to use Tier 1, 2, or 3 have the option to use a higher tier methodology.
b Hoursof operation in any year since 2005.
Note: Facilities with units reporting CO2 data to ARP should refer to Section V.D of this preamble (Electricity Generation).
2. Selection of Reporting Threshold CO2e. Table C–2 of this preamble are not covered in other subparts of the
illustrates the emissions covered and proposed rule. For this reason, the total
In developing the threshold for the number of facilities that would be emissions presented in Table C–2 of this
facilities with stationary combustion covered under these various thresholds. preamble appear as a lower total than
equipment, EPA considered an It should be noted that Table C–2 of this presented previously (the general
emissions-based threshold of 1,000, preamble only includes facilities with discussion in Section C.1 of this
10,000, 25,000, and 100,000 metric tons stationary combustion equipment that preamble), where emissions from all
stationary combustion equipment are

being discussed.
TABLE C–2. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR UNSPECIFIED INDUSTRIAL STATIONARY FUEL COMBUSTION
Total national Emissions covered Facilities covered
emissions Total number
Threshold level metric tons CO2e/yr (million Million
of facilities
metric tons metric tons Percent Number Percent
CO2e) CO2e/yr
1,000 410 350,000 250 61 32,000 9.1

10,000 410 350,000 230 56 8,000 2.3
25,000 410 350,000 220 54 3,000 0.9
100,000 410 350,000 170 41 1,000 0.3
In calculating emissions for this to the other provisions of this rule. EPA rule states that GHG emissions from
analysis, and for the proposed believes that most of the population of biomass fuel combustion are to be
threshold, only CO2 from the facilities over a 100,000 metric tons excluded when evaluating a facility’s
combustion of fossil fuels, in CO2e threshold is known either through status with respect to the 25,000 metric
combination with all CH4 and N2O source category studies or existing EPA tons CO2e reporting threshold. This is
emissions, are considered. CO2 reporting programs. similar to the approach taken by the
emissions from biomass are not The 10,000 metric tons CO2e IPCC and various other GHG emission
considered as part of the determination threshold showed a smaller incremental inventories.
of the threshold level. This treatment of gain in emissions coverage from a Finally, EPA considered a heat input
biomass fuels is consistent with the higher threshold than the 25,000 metric capacity-based threshold (such as all
IPCC Guidelines and the annual tons CO2e threshold, while greatly facilities with stationary combustion
Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas increasing the incremental number of equipment rated over 100 mmBtu/hr
Emissions and Sinks, which account for reporters (as illustrated in Table C–2 of maximum heat input capacity). A
the release of these CO2 emissions in this preamble). The 1,000 metric tons complete, reliable set of heat input
accounting for carbon stock changes CO2e threshold greatly increases the capacity data was unavailable for all
from agriculture, forestry, and other total number of reporters for this rule facilities that might be subject to this
land-use. CH4 and N2O emissions from and places an unnecessary rule, thus this type of threshold could
combustion of biomass are counted as administrative burden on EPA, while not be thoroughly evaluated.
part of stationary combustion within the not greatly increasing nationwide For a full discussion of the threshold
IPCC and national U.S. GHG inventory emissions coverage of stationary analysis and for background information
frameworks. combustion sources. on this threshold determination, please
The purpose of the general stationary In addition, although there is refer to the Thresholds TSD (EPA–HQ–
combustion source category is to considerable uncertainty as to the OAR–2008–0508–046). For specific
capture significant emitters of stationary number of facilities under a 25,000 information on costs, including
combustion GHG emissions that are not metric tons CO2e threshold, there is unamortized first year capital
covered by the specific source categories evidence to indicate that moving the expenditures, please refer to section 4 of
described elsewhere in this preamble. threshold from 25,000 to 10,000 metric the RIA and the RIA cost appendix.
Therefore, EPA is proposing a threshold tons CO2e would have a
3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring
for reporting emissions from stationary disproportionate impact on the
Methods
combustion at 25,000 metric tons commercial sector. It should also be
CO2e.63 EPA selected the proposed noted that this concern is even more EPA’s proposed methods for
25,000 metric tons CO2e threshold as it applicable to the 1,000 metric tons CO2e calculating GHG emissions from
appears to strike the best balance threshold. stationary fuel combustion sources is
between covering a high percentage of EPA concluded that a 25,000 metric consistent with existing domestic and
nationwide GHG emissions and keeping tons CO2e threshold would better international protocols, as well as
the number of affected facilities achieve a comprehensive economy wide monitoring programs currently
manageable. As illustrated in Table C– coverage of emissions while focusing implemented by EPA. Those protocols
2 of this preamble, selecting a 25,000 reporting efforts on large industrial and programs generally utilize either a
metric tons CO2e threshold achieves the emitters. In particular, it would address direct measurement approach based on
greatest incremental gain in coverage the considerable uncertainties in the concentrations of combustion exhaust
with the lowest increase in the number 25,000 to 100,000 metric tons CO2e gases through a stack, or a direct
of covered sources. emissions range, both as to the number measurement approach based on the
The 100,000 metric tons CO2e of reporters and the magnitude of quantity of fuel combusted and the
threshold was not proposed because emissions. EPA believes that a 25,000 characteristics of the fuel (e.g., heat
EPA believes it would exclude too many metric tons CO2e threshold would help content, carbon content, etc.). As the
significant emitters of GHG emissions in gathering data from a reasonable magnitude of CO2 emissions released by
that are not required to report pursuant number of reporters for which little stationary combustion sources relative
information is currently known without to CH4 and N2O is greater (even on a
63 As described previously, the threshold only
imposing undue administrative burden. CO2e basis), more guidance is provided
includes CO2 from the combustion of fossil fuels EPA also considered including GHG on the application of specific
and CH4 and N2O emissions from all fuel
combustion. CO2 emissions from biomass are not
emissions from the combustion of monitoring and calculation methods for
considered as part of the determination of the biomass fuels in the emission threshold CO2. EPA is proposing simpler
threshold level. calculations. Therefore, the proposed calculation methods for CH4 and N2O.
For facilities which have EGUs preamble. These CO2 emission The incremental cost of adding a
subject to the ARP reporting calculation methods would, in some diluent gas (CO2 or O2) monitor or a
requirements under 40 CFR part 75, cases, be applied at the unit level, and flow monitor, or both, to meet Tier 4
refer to Section V.D of this preamble in other cases at the facility level (for monitoring requirements would likely
regarding those units. For other units further discussion, see ‘‘Selection of not be unduly burdensome for a large
located at that facility (i.e., units that are Data Reporting Requirements’’ below). unit that combusts solid fossil fuels or
not reporting to the ARP), the facility Affected facilities would have the MSW, operates frequently, and is
would use the calculation methods flexibility to use higher-tier methods already required to install, certify,
presented below. (i.e., more stringent methods) than the maintain, and operate CEMS and to
The discussions which follow in this ones required by this rule. perform on-going QA testing of the
subsection will focus on methods for: (a) Tier 4. The Tier 4 methodology would existing monitors. The cost of
The calculation of CO2 emissions from require the use of certified CEMS to compliance with the proposed rule
fuel combustion; (b) the calculation for quantify CO2 mass emissions, where would be even less for units that already
the separate reporting of biogenic CO2 existing CEMS equipment is installed. have all of the necessary monitors in
emissions; (c) reporting biogenic CO2 The existing installed CEMS must place. Cost estimates are provided in the
emissions from MSW; (d) the include a gas monitor of any kind or a RIA (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–002).
calculation of CH4 and N2O emissions; flow monitor (or both). Generally, a CO2 In addition, EPA is allowing provisions
and (e) the calculation of additional CO2 monitor and a stack gas volumetric flow to monitor common stack
emissions from the sorbent in rate monitor would be required to configurations. Please refer to Section
combustion control technology systems. calculate CO2 emissions, although in V.C.5 of this preamble, on data reporting
some cases, in lieu of a CO2 requirements, for further information on
a. CO2 Emissions From Fuel
concentration monitor, data from a reporting where there are common stack
Combustion
certified oxygen (O2) concentration configurations.
To monitor and calculate CO2 monitor and fuel-specific F-factors
emissions from stationary combustion Reporters would follow the reporting
could be used to calculate hourly CO2 requirements stated in proposed 40 CFR
sources, EPA is proposing a four-tiered concentrations. An appropriate upgrade
approach, which would be applied part 98, subpart A. However, EPA is
of the existing CEMS would be required: allowing a January 1, 2011 compliance
either at the unit or facility level. The (1) If the gas monitor is neither a CO2
most stringent emissions calculation date to install CEMS to meet the Tier 4
concentration monitor nor an O2 requirements, if either a diluent gas
methods would apply to large stationary concentration monitor and (2) if a flow
combustion units that are fired with monitor, flow monitor, or both, must be
monitor is not already installed.
solid fuels and that have existing CEMS added. The January 1, 2011 deadline
Any CEMS that would be used to
equipment. This is due to the quantify CO2 emissions would also have would allow sufficient time to purchase,
complexity of monitoring solid fuel to be certified and undergo on-going install, and certify any additional
consumption and the heterogeneous quality-assurance testing according to monitor(s) needed to quantify CO2 mass
nature of solid fuels. Furthermore, the procedures specified in either: (1) 40 emissions. Until that time, affected units
because of the significant mass of CO2 CFR part 75; or (2) 40 CFR part 60, subject to that deadline would be
emissions that are released by these Appendix B; or (3) a State monitoring allowed to use the Tier 3 methodology
large units, combining stringent program. in 2010.
methods and existing monitoring The Tier 4 method, and the use of Tier 3. The Tier 3 calculation
equipment is justified. CEMS (with any required monitor methodology would require periodic
The next level of methodological upgrades), is required for solid fossil determination of the carbon content of
stringency applies to large stationary fuel-fired units with a maximum heat the fuel, using consensus standards
combustion units that are fired with input capacity greater than 250 mmBtu/ listed in the proposed 40 CFR part 98
liquid or gaseous fuels. The stringency hr (and for units with a capacity to (e.g., ASTM methods) and direct
of the methods reflects the homogenous combust greater than 250 tons per day measurement of the amount of fuel
nature of these fuels and the ability to of MSW). The use of an O2 monitor to combusted. This methodology is
monitor fuel consumption more determine CO2 concentrations would required for liquid and gaseous fossil
precisely. However, in cases where not be allowed for units combusting fuel-fired units with a maximum heat
there is greater heterogeneity in the MSW. EPA is unaware of carbon-based input capacity greater than 250 mmBtu/
fuels (e.g., refinery fuel gas) more F-factors for MSW that would be hr, and is required for solid fossil fuel-
frequent analyses of liquid and gaseous appropriate for converting O2 readings fired units that are not subject to the
fuels is required. to CO2 concentrations for this rule. Tier 4 provisions. In addition, EPA is
For smaller combustion units, EPA is Therefore, units combusting MSW proposing that a facility may use the
proposing to allow the use of more would need to use a CO2 monitor to Tier 3 calculation methodology to
simplified emissions calculation calculate CO2 emissions. calculate facility-wide CO2 emissions
methods that rely on relationships For smaller solid fossil fuel-fired units (rather than unit-by-unit emissions)
between the heat content of the fuel (a (i.e., less than or equal to 250 mmBtu/ when the same liquid or gaseous fuel is
generally known parameter) and the hr or 250 tons per day of MSW), EPA used across the facility and a common
CO2 emission factor associated with the would require the use of Tier 4 if all the direct measurement of fuel consumed is
fuel’s characteristics. monitors needed to calculate CO2 mass available (e.g., a natural gas meter at the
The following subsections present emissions (i.e., CO2 gas monitor and facility gate). This flexibility is
EPA’s proposed four-tiered approach in flow monitor) are already installed, and consistent with existing protocols and
order from the most rigorous to the least certified and quality assured as methodologies allowed by EPA in
stringent, and describe how it must be described above. existing programs. Please refer to the
used by affected facilities. The In addition, in order to be subject to subsequent subsection on data reporting
applicability of the four measurement the Tier 4 requirements, the unit must requirements for further information on
tiers, based on unit size and fuel type, have been operated for 1,000 hours or the use of fuel data from common
is summarized in Table C–1 of this more in any calendar year since 2005. supply lines.
The required frequency for carbon specific HHV and emission factors in Finally, EPA considered allowing
content determinations for the Tier 3 proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C. affected facilities to rely exclusively on
calculation methodology would be However, if the owner or operator the results of fuel sampling and analysis
monthly for natural gas, liquid fuels, routinely performs fuel sampling and provided by fuel suppliers, rather than
and solid fuels (monthly molecular analysis on a monthly (or more performing periodic on-site sampling for
weight determinations are also required frequent) basis to determine the HHV all variables. The Agency decided not to
for gaseous fuels). Daily determinations and other properties of the fuel, or if propose this because in most instances,
for other gaseous fuels (e.g., refinery gas, monthly HHV data are provided by the only the fuel heating value, not the
process gas, etc.) would be required. fuel supplier, Tier 1 could not be used carbon content, is routinely provided by
The daily fuel sampling requirement for but instead Tier 2 (or a higher tier) fuel suppliers. Therefore, EPA proposes
units that combust ‘‘other’’ gaseous fuels would have to be used. to allow fuel suppliers to provide fuel
would likely not be overly burdensome, EPA considered several alternative HHVs for the Tier 2 calculation method.
because the types of facilities that burn CO2 emission calculation methods of However, EPA is requesting comment
these fuels are likely to have equipment varying stringency for stationary on integrating the fuel supplier
in place (e.g., on-line gas combustion units. The most stringent requirements of this proposed rule with
chromatographs) to continuously method would have required all both the Tier 1 and Tier 2 calculation
monitor the fuels’ characteristics in combustion units at the affected methodologies.
order to optimize process operation. facilities to use 40 CFR part 75 b. CO2 Emissions From Biomass Fuel
Solid fuel samples would be taken monitoring methodologies. However, Combustion
weekly and composited, but would only this option was not pursued because it
be analyzed once a month. Also, fuel would have likely imposed an undue Today’s proposed rule requires
sampling and analysis would be cost burden, particularly on smaller affected facilities with units that
required only for those days or months entities. For homogenous fuels, this combust biomass fuels to report the
when fuel is combusted in the unit. additional cost burden would probably annual biogenic CO2 mass emissions
For liquid and gaseous fuels, Tier 3 separately. As previously described, this
not lead to significant increases in
would require direct measurement of is consistent with the approach taken in
accuracy compared with Tiers 1–3.
the amount of fuel combusted, using the IPCC and national U.S. GHG
For coal combustion, EPA evaluated a
calibrated fuel flow meters. inventory frameworks. EPA is proposing
number of calculation methods used in
Alternatively, for fuel oil, tank drop distinct methods to determine the
other mandatory and voluntary GHG
measurements could be used. Solid fuel biogenic CO2 emissions from a
emissions reporting programs. In
consumption would be quantified using stationary combustion source
general, these methods require relatively
company records. For quality-assurance combusting a biomass or biomass-
infrequent fuel sampling, do not take
purposes, EPA proposes that all oil and derived fuel depending upon which tier
into account the heat input capacity of
gas flow meters would have to be is used for reporting other fuel
stationary combustion equipment, and
calibrated prior to the first reporting combustion CO2 emissions.
use company records to estimate fuel Where Tier 4 is not required, EPA is
year. EPA recommends the use of the
consumption. Given the heterogeneous allowing the Tier 1 method to be used
fuel flow meter calibration methods in
characteristics of coal, EPA determined to calculate biogenic CO2 emissions for
40 CFR part 75, but, alternatively, the
that the procedures used in these other fuels in which EPA has provided default
manufacturer’s recommended procedure
could be used. Tank drop measurements programs are not rigorous enough for CO2 emission factors and a default HHV
and carbon content determinations this proposed rule and would introduce in the proposed rule. If default values
would be made using the appropriate significant uncertainty into the CO2 are not provided by EPA, the facility
methods incorporated by reference. emissions estimates, especially for would use the Tier 2 or Tier 3 method,
Tier 2. The Tier 2 calculation larger combustion units. as appropriate, to calculate the biogenic
methodology would require that the EPA considered allowing the use of CO2 emissions.
HHVs of each fuel combusted would be default emission factors, default HHVs, For units required to use Tier 4, total
measured monthly. EPA is proposing and company records to quantify annual CO2 emissions are directly measured
that the Tier 2 method be used by units fuel consumption for all stationary using CEMS. Except when MSW is
with heat input capacities of 250 combustion units, regardless of size or combusted, EPA proposes that facilities
mmBtu/hr or less, combusting fuels for the type of fuel combusted. The Agency perform a supplemental calculation to
which EPA has provided default CO2 decided to limit the use of this type of determine the biogenic CO2 and non-
emission factors in the proposed rule. calculation methodology to smaller biogenic CO2 portions of the measured
Fuel consumption would be based on combustion units. The proposed rule CO2 emissions. The facility would use
company records. Please refer to the reflects this, by allowing use of the Tier company records on annual fossil fuel
subsequent subsection on data reporting 1 and Tier 2 calculation methodologies combusted to calculate the annual
requirements for further information on at units with a maximum heat input volume of CO2 emitted from that fossil
the aggregation of units. capacity of 250 mmBtu/hr or less. fuel combustion. This value would then
Tier 1. Under Tier 1, the annual CO2 For gaseous fuel combustion, EPA be subtracted from the total volume of
mass emissions would be calculated considered calculation methodologies CO2 emissions measured to obtain the
using the quantity of each type of fuel based on an assumption that all gaseous volume of biogenic CO2 emissions. The
combusted during the year, in fuels are homogeneous. However, the volume ratio of biogenic CO2 emissions
conjunction with fuel-specific default Agency decided against this approach to total CO2 emissions would then be
CO2 emission factors and default HHVs. because the characteristics of certain applied to the measured total CO2
The amount of fuel combusted would be gaseous fuels can be quite variable, and emissions to determine the biogenic CO2
determined from company records. The mixtures of gaseous fuels are often emissions.
default CO2 emission factors and HHVs heterogeneous in composition.
are national-level default factors. The Therefore, the proposed rule requires c. CO2 Emissions From MSW
Tier 1 method may be used by any small daily sampling for all gaseous fuels EPA is proposing a separate
unit if EPA has provided the fuel- except for natural gas. calculation method for a unit that
combusts MSW, which can include consistency among reporters. However, company records are used to quantify
biomass components. For units subject it was decided that this option was too solid fuel usage. These records would
to Tier 4, as described above, an costly for the small improvement in data describe the procedures used to
additional analysis would be required to quality that it might achieve. The CH4 calibrate weighing equipment and other
separately report any biogenic CO2 and N2O emissions from stationary measurement devices, and would
emissions. The reporter would be combustion are relatively low compared include scientifically-based estimates of
required to use ASTM methods listed in to the CO2 emissions. The proposed the accuracy of these devices. EPA
the rule to sample and analyze the CO2 approach, i.e., using fuel-specific therefore solicits comment on ways to
in the flue gas once each quarter, in default emission factors to calculate CH4 ensure that the feed rate of solid fuel to
order to determine the relative and N2O emissions, is in accordance a combustion device is accurately
percentages of fossil fuel-based carbon with methods used in other programs measured.
(e.g., petroleum-based plastics) and and provides data of sufficient accuracy.
biomass carbon (e.g., newsprint) in the However, given the unit-level approach 4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating
effluent when MSW is combusted in the for calculating CO2 emissions, EPA is Missing Data
unit. The measured ratio of biogenic to requesting comments on the use of more The proposed rule requires the use of
fossil CO2 concentrations is then technology-specific CH4 and N2O substitute data whenever a quality-
applied to the measured or calculated emission factors that could be applied assured value of a parameter that is used
total CO2 emissions to determine in unit-level calculations. to calculate GHG emissions is
biogenic CO2 emissions. unavailable, commonly referred to as
The GHG emission calculation e. CO2 Emissions From Sorbent
‘‘missing data.’’ For units using the CO2
methods for units combusting MSW For fluidized bed boilers and for units calculation methodologies in Tiers 2
would be used in conjunction with equipped with flue gas desulfurization and 3, when HHV, fuel carbon content,
EPA’s proposed calculation method for systems or other acid gas emission or fuel molecular weight data are
the annual unit heat input, based on controls with sorbent injection, CO2 missing, the substitute data value would
steam production and the design emissions would be accounted for and be the average of the quality-assured
characteristics of the combustion unit. reported using simplified methods.
values of the parameter immediately
For units that combust MSW, EPA These methods are based on the
before and immediately after the
considered allowing a manual sorting quantity of limestone or other sorbent
missing data period. When Tier 3 or
approach to be used to determine the material used during the year, if not
Tier 4 is used and fuel flow rate or stack
biomass and non-biomass fractions of accounted for using the Tier 4
gas flow rate data is missing, the
the fuel, based on defined and traceable calculation methodology.
In summary, EPA is proposing to substitute data values would be the best
input streams. However, this approach
allow facilities flexibility in measuring available estimates of these parameters,
is not considered practical, given the
and monitoring stationary fuel based on process and operating data
highly variable composition of MSW. To
combustion sources by: (1) Allowing (e.g., production rate, load, unit
eliminate this uncertainty, EPA believes
most smaller combustion units operating time, etc.). This same
that more rigorous and standardized
(depending upon facility-level substitute data approach would be used
ASTM methods should be used to
considerations described above) to use when fuel usage data and sorbent usage
determine the biogenic percentage of the
the Tier 1 and Tier 2 calculation data are missing. The proposed rule
CO2 emissions when MSW is
methods; (2) allowing Tier 3 to be provides that the reporter would be
combusted.
widely used, with few restrictions; (3) required to document and keep record
d. CH4 and N2O Emissions From All limiting the requirement to use Tier 4 to of the procedures used to determine the
Fuel Combustion certain solid fuel-fired combustion units appropriate substitute data values.
As described previously, EPA is located at facilities where there is an EPA considered more conservative
allowing simplified emissions established monitoring infrastructure; missing data procedures for the
calculation methods for CH4 and N2O. and (4) allowing simplified proposed rule, such as requiring higher
The annual CH4 and N2O emissions methodologies to calculate CH4 and N2O substitute data values for longer missing
would be estimated using EPA-provided emissions. In addition, EPA is using a data periods, but decided against
default emission factors and annual heat maximum heat input capacity proposing these procedures out of
input values. The calculation would determination of 250 mmBtu/hr to concern that GHG emissions might be
either be done at the unit level or the distinguish between large and small significantly overestimated.
facility level, depending upon the tier units. This approach is common to 5. Selection of Data Reporting
required for estimating CO2 emissions many existing EPA programs. Requirements
(and using the same heat input value EPA believes that the proposed
reported from the CO2 calculation default CO2 emission factors and high In addition to the facility-level
method). heat values used in Tiers 1 and 2 and information that would be reported
A CEMS methodology was not the ASTM methods incorporated by under proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart
selected for measuring N2O primarily reference for the carbon content A, the proposed rule would require the
because the cost impacts of requiring determinations required by Tier 3 are reporter to submit certain unit-level data
the installation of CEMS is high in well-established and minimize for the stationary combustion units at
comparison to the relatively low amount uncertainty. each affected facility. This additional
of N2O emissions (even on a CO2e basis) In proposing this tiered approach, information would require reporting of
that would be emitted from stationary EPA acknowledges that, in the case of the unit type, its maximum rated heat
combustion equipment. solid fuels, a simple, standardized way input, the type of fuel combusted in the
EPA considered requiring periodic of measuring the amount of solid fuel unit during the report year, the
stack testing to derive site-specific combusted in a unit is not proposed. In methodology used to calculate CO2
emission factors for CH4 and N2O. This view of this, the proposed rule would emissions for each type of fuel
approach has the advantage of ensuring require the owner or operator to keep combusted, and the total annual GHG
a higher level of accuracy and detailed records explaining how emissions from the unit.
To reduce the reporting burden, the and biomass fuels are combusted and facilities with EGUs that are in the ARP,
proposed rule would allow reporting of CEMS are used to measure CO2 and are subject to the CO2 emissions
the combined GHG emissions from emissions, the annual volumes of reporting requirements of Section 821 of
multiple units at the facility instead of biogenic and fossil CO2 would be the CAA Amendments of 1990. All
requiring emissions reporting for each reported, along with the F-factors and other facilities using stationary fuel
individual unit, in certain instances. fuel gross calorific values used in the combustion equipment to generate
Three types of emissions aggregation calculations, and the biogenic electricity should refer to Section V.C of
would be allowed. First, the combined percentage of the annual CO2 emissions. this preamble (General Stationary Fuel
GHG emissions from a group (or groups) Finally, for units that use acid gas Combustion Sources) to understand
of small units at a facility could be scrubbing with sorbent injection but are EPA’s proposed approach for GHG
reported, provided that the combined not equipped with CEMS, the owner or emissions reporting.
maximum rated heat input of the units operator would be required to report Electricity generating units in the ARP
in the group does not exceed 250 information on the type and amount of reported CO2 emissions of 2,262 million
mmBtu/hr. Second, the combined GHG sorbent used. metric tons CO2e in 2006. This
emissions from units in a common stack represents almost one third of total U.S.
configuration could be reported, if 6. Selection of Records That Must Be
Retained GHG emissions and over 90 percent of
CEMS are used to continuously monitor CO2 emissions from electricity
the CO2 emissions at the common stack. In addition to meeting the general generation. EPA has been receiving
Third, if a facility combusts the same recordkeeping requirements in proposed these CO2 data since 1995.64
type of homogeneous oil or gaseous fuel 40 CFR part 98, subpart A, whenever
through a common supply line, and the company records are used to estimate 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
total amount of fuel consumed through fuel consumption (e.g., when the Tier 1
that supply line is accurately measured or 2 emissions calculation methodology If a facility includes within its
using a calibrated fuel flow meter, the is used) and sorbent consumption, EPA boundaries at least one EGU that is
combined GHG emissions from the proposes to require the owner or subject to the ARP, the facility would be
facility could be reported. operator to keep on file a detailed subject to the mandatory GHG emissions
Different levels of verification data are explanation of how fuel usage is reporting of proposed 40 CFR part 98,
required depending upon which tier is quantified, including a description of subpart D. Facilities with EGUs in the
used for reporting. For Tier 1, only the the QA procedures that are used to ARP would not be expected to report
total quantity of each type of fuel ensure measurement accuracy (e.g., any new CO2 data. Therefore, EPA
combusted during the report year would calibration of weighing devices and expects that the GHG emissions
be reported. For Tier 2, the quantity of other instrumentation). reporting requirements of this rule
each type of fuel combusted during each As discussed in Section IV of this would not be overly burdensome for
measurement period would be reported, preamble and proposed 40 CFR part 98, facilities already reporting to the ARP.
along with all high heat values used in subpart A, there are a number of For specific information on costs,
the emissions calculations, the methods facilities that are not part of a source including unamortized first year capital
used to determine the HHVs, and category listed in 40 CFR 98.2(1)(a) or expenditures, please refer to section 4 of
information indicating which HHVs (if (2) but have stationary combustion the RIA and the RIA cost appendix.
any) are substitute data values. equipment emitting GHG emissions. In
For Tier 3, the quantity of each type 3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring
2010, those facilities would have to Methods
of fuel combusted during each determine whether or not they are
measurement period (day or month) subject to the requirements of this rule For ARP units, the CO2 mass
would be reported, along with all (i.e., if their emissions are 25,000 metric emissions data already reported to EPA
carbon content values and, if applicable, tons CO2e/yr or higher). In order to under 40 CFR part 75 would be used in
molecular weight measurements used in reduce the burden on those facilities, we the annual GHG emissions reports
the emissions calculations, with are proposing that facilities with an required under this proposed rule. The
information indicating which ones (if aggregate maximum heat input capacity annual CO2 mass emissions (i.e., English
any) are substitute data values. In of less than 30 mmBtu/hr from short tons) reported for an ARP unit
addition, the results of all fuel flow stationary combustion units are would simply be converted to metric
meter calibrations would be reported automatically exempt from the proposed tons and then included in the GHG
along with information indicating emissions report for the facility.
40 CFR part 98. Based on our
which analytical methods were used for
assessment of the maximum amount of As CH4 and N2O emissions are not
the carbon content determinations, flow
GHG emissions likely from units of that required to be reported under 40 CFR
meter calibrations and (if applicable) oil
size that burn fossil fuels (e.g, coal, oil part 75, the facility would consult the
tank drop measurements.
or gas) and operate continuously proposed methods in proposed 40 CFR
For Tier 4, the number of unit
through the year, such a facility would part 98, subpart C (General Stationary
operating days and hours would be
still be below the 25,000 metric tons Fuel Combustion Sources) for
reported, along with daily CO2 mass
CO2e threshold. The purpose for having calculating CH4 and N2O from the ARP
emission totals, the number of hours of
this provision is to exempt small units.
substitute data used in the annual
facilities from having to estimate
emissions calculations, the results of the The additional units at an affected
emissions to determine if they are
initial CEMS certification tests and the facility that are not in the ARP would
subject to the rule, and re-estimate
major ongoing QA tests. use the GHG calculation methods
If MSW is combusted in the unit, the whenever there are process changes.
specified and required in proposed 40
owner or operator would be required to D. Electricity Generation CFR part 98, subpart C (General
report the results of the quarterly Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources).
sample analyses used to determine the 1. Definition of the Source Category
biogenic percentage of CO2 emissions in This section of the preamble 64 This data can be accessed at: http://epa.gov/
the effluent. If combinations of fossil addresses GHG emissions reporting for camdataandmaps.
4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating synthetic lubricants. Commercially, it is types of technologies and level of
Missing Data the most important of the aliphatic emission controls employed by a
The proposed missing data dicarboxylic acids, which are used to facility. DE for N2O emissions can vary
substitution procedures for CH4 and manufacture polyesters. Adipic acid is from 90 to 98 percent using abatement
N2O emissions from ARP units and all also used in food applications. technologies such as nonselective
Adipic acid is produced through a catalytic reduction. In 1998, the three
GHG emissions from units at the facility
two-stage process. The first stage major adipic acid production facilities
not in ARP are discussed in Section
usually involves the oxidation of in the U.S. had control systems in place.
V.C.4 of this preamble, under General
cyclohexane to form a cyclohexanone/ Only one small facility, representing
Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources.
cyclohexanol mixture. The second stage approximately two percent of adipic
5. Selection of Data Reporting involves oxidizing this mixture with acid production, does not control for
Requirements nitric acid to produce adipic acid. N2O.
National emissions from adipic acid
The proposed data reporting As part of this proposed rule,
production were estimated to be 9.3
requirements are discussed in Section stationary combustion emissions would
million metric tons CO2e (less than 0.1
V.C.5 of this preamble, under General be estimated and reported according to
percent of U.S. GHG emissions) in 2006.
Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources. These emissions include both process- the applicable procedures in proposed
6. Selection of Records That Must Be related emissions (N2O) and on-site 40 CFR part 98, subpart C. For
Retained stationary combustion emissions (CO2, additional background information on
CH4, and N2O). The main GHG emitted adipic acid production, please refer to
The records that must be retained the Adipic Acid Production TSD (EPA–
from adipic acid production is N2O,
regarding CH4 and N2O emissions from HQ–OAR–2008–0508–005).
which is generated as a by-product of
ARP units and all GHG emissions from
the nitric acid oxidation stage of the 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
units at the facility not in the ARP are
manufacturing process, and it is emitted
discussed in Section V.C.6 of this In developing the threshold for adipic
in the waste gas stream. Process N2O
preamble, under General Stationary acid production, we considered
emissions alone were estimated at 5.9
Fuel Combustion Sources. emissions-based thresholds of 1,000
million metric tons CO2e, or 64 percent
E. Adipic Acid Production of the total GHG emissions in 2006, metric tons CO2e, 10,000 metric tons
while on-site stationary combustion CO2e, 25,000 metric tons CO2e and
1. Definition of the Source Category 100,000 metric tons CO2e. Table E–1 of
emissions account for the remaining 3.4
Adipic acid is a white crystalline million metric tons CO2e, or 36 percent this preamble illustrates that the various
solid used in the manufacture of of the total. thresholds do not affect the amount of
synthetic fibers, plastics, coatings, Process emissions from the emissions or number of facilities that
urethane foams, elastomers, and production of adipic acid vary with the would be covered.
TABLE E–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR ADIPIC ACID PRODUCTION

Emissions covered Facilities covered
Threshold level Total national Total number
metric tons CO2e/yr emissions of facilities Metric tons
CO2e/yr Percent Number Percent
1,000 .................................................................... 9,300,000 4 9,300,000 100 4 100

10,000 .................................................................. 9,300,000 4 9,300,000 100 4 100
25,000 .................................................................. 9,300,000 4 9,300,000 100 4 100
100,000 ................................................................ 9,300,000 4 9,300,000 100 4 100
Facility-level emissions estimates section 4 of the RIA and the RIA cost abatement of N2O emissions. This
based on known facility capacities for appendix. approach is consistent with IPCC Tier 1
the four known adipic acid facilities and the DOE 1605(b) ‘‘C’’ rated
suggests that each of the facilities would estimation method.
Methods Option 2. Default emission factors
be at least five times over the 100,000
metric tons CO2e threshold based on Many domestic and international would be applied on a site-specific basis
just process-related emissions. Because GHG monitoring guidelines and using the specific type of abatement
all adipic acid production facilities protocols include methodologies for technology used and the adipic acid
would have to report under any of the estimating adipic acid production production activity. The amount of N2O
emission thresholds that were process emissions (e.g., 2006 IPCC emissions would be determined by
examined, we propose that all adipic Guidelines, U.S. Inventory, DOE multiplying the technology-specific
acid production facilities be required to 1605(b), and TRI). These methodologies emission factor by the production level
report. This would simplify rule coalesce around the four options of adipic acid. This approach is
applicability and avoid any burden for discussed below. consistent with 1605(b) ‘‘B’’ rated
the source to perform unnecessary Option 1. Default emission factors estimation method, IPCC Tier 2, and
calculations. would be applied to total facility TCR’s ‘‘B’’ rated estimation method.
For a full discussion of the threshold production of adipic acid. The Option 3. Periodic direct emission
analysis, please refer to the Adipic Acid emissions would be calculated using the measurement of N2O emissions would
Production TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– total production of adipic acid and the be used to determine the relationship
0508–005). For specific information on highest international default emission between adipic acid production and the
costs, including unamortized first year factor available in the 2006 IPCC amount of N2O emissions; i.e., to
capital expenditures, please refer to Guidelines. This option assumes no develop a facility-specific emissions
factor. The facility-specific emissions NOX CEMS only capture emissions of basis of the calculations and are needed
factor and production rate (activity NO and NO2 and not N2O. Although the to understand the emissions data and
level) would be used to calculate the amount of NOX and N2O emissions from verify the reasonableness of the reported
emissions. The facility-specific emission adipic acid production may be directly emissions. The data submitted on an
factor would be developed from a single related, direct measurement of NOX annual basis should include annual
annual test. Production rate is most does not automatically correlate to the adipic acid production capacity, total
likely already measured at facilities. amount of N2O in the same exhaust adipic acid production, facility-specific
Existing procedures would be followed stream. Periodic testing of N2O emission rate factor used, abatement
to measure the production rate during emissions (Option 3) would not indicate technology used, abatement technology
the performance test and on a quarterly changes in emissions over short periods efficiency, abatement utilization factor,
basis thereafter. After the initial test, of time, but it does offer direct and number of facility operating hours
annual testing of N2O emissions would measurement of GHGs. in calendar year.
be required each year to estimate the We request comment on the Capacity, actual production, and
emission factor and applied to advantages and disadvantages of using operating hours support verification of
production to estimate emissions. The Options 3 and 4. After consideration of the emissions data provided by the
yearly testing would assist in verifying public comments, we may promulgate facility. The production rate can be
the emission factor. Testing would also one or more of these options or a determined through sales records or by
be required whenever the production combination based on the additional direct measurement using flow meters
rate is changed by more than 10 percent information that is provided. or weigh scales. This industry generally
from the production rate measured We decided against Options 1 and 2 measures the production rate as part of
during the most recent performance test. because facility-specific emission normal operating procedures.
Option 3 and the following Option 4 are factors are more appropriate for A list of abatement technologies
approaches consistent with IPCC Tier 3, reflecting differences in process design would be helpful in assessing the
DOE 1605(b) ‘‘A’’ and TCR’s ‘‘A2’’ rated and operation. According to IPCC, the widespread use of abatement in the
estimation methods. default emission factors for adipic acid adipic acid source category, cataloging
Option 4. CEMS would be used to are relatively certain because they are any new technologies that are being
directly measure the N2O process derived from the stoichiometry of the used, and documenting the amount of
emissions. CEMS would be used to chemical reaction employed to oxidize time that the abatement technologies are
directly measure N2O concentration and nitric acid. However, there is still being used.
flow rate to directly determine N2O uncertainty in the amount of N2O that A full list of data to be reported is
emissions. Measuring N2O emissions is generated. This variability is a result included in the proposed 40 CFR part
directly with CEMS is feasible, but of differences in the composition of 98, subparts A and E.
adipic acid production facilities are cyclohexanone and cyclohexanol
currently only using NOX CEMS to feedstock. Variability also arises if 6. Selection of Records That Must Be
comply with State programs (e.g. Texas). adipic acid is produced from use of Retained
Half of the adipic acid production other feedstocks, such as phenol or We propose that facilities maintain
facilities are located in Texas where hydrogen peroxide. Facility-specific records of annual testing of N2O
NOX CEMS are required in O3 emission factors would be based on emissions, calculation of the facility-
nonattainment areas under Control of actual feedstock composition rather specific emission rate factor, hours of
Air Pollution from Nitrogen Compounds than an assumed composition. operation, annual adipic acid
(TX Chap 117 (Reg 7)). The various approaches to monitoring production, adipic acid production
Proposed option: We propose Option GHG emissions are elaborated in the capacity, and N2O emissions. These
3 to quantify process emissions from all Adipic Acid Production TSD (EPA–HQ– records hold values directly used to
adipic acid facilities. In addition, you OAR–2008–0508–005). calculate the emissions that are reported
would be required to follow the and are necessary to allow
requirements of proposed 40 CFR part 4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating
Missing Data determination of whether the GHG
98, subpart C to estimate emissions of emissions monitoring calculations were
CO2, CH4 and N2O from stationary For process sources that use Option 3 done correctly. A full list of records that
combustion. (facility-specific emission factor), no must be retained on site is included in
We identified Options 3 and 4 as the missing data procedures would apply the proposed 40 CFR part 98, subparts
approaches providing the lowest because the facility-specific emission A and E.
uncertainty and the best site-specific factor is derived from an annual
estimates based on differences in performance test and used in each F. Aluminum Production
process operation and abatement calculation. The emission factor would 1. Definition of the Source Category
technologies. Option 3 requires annual be multiplied by the production rate,
monitoring of N2O emissions and the which is readily available. If the test This source category includes primary
establishment of a facility-specific data are missing or lost, the test would aluminum production facilities.
emissions factor that relates N2O have to be repeated. Therefore, 100 Secondary aluminum production
emissions with adipic acid production percent data availability would be facilities would not be required to report
rate. required. emissions under Subpart F. Aluminum
Option 4 was not chosen as the is a light-weight, malleable, and
required method because, while N2O 5. Selection of Data Reporting corrosion-resistant metal that is used in
CEMS are available, there is no existing Requirements manufactured products in many sectors
EPA method for certifying N2O CEMS, We propose that facilities submit their including transportation, packaging,
and the cost impact of requiring the total annual N2O emissions from adipic building and construction. As of 2005,
installation of CEMS is high in acid production, as well as any the U.S. was the fourth largest producer
comparison to the relatively low amount stationary fuel combustion emissions. In of primary aluminum, with
of emissions that would be quantified addition we propose that facilities approximately eight percent of the
from the adipic acid production sector. submit the following data, which are the world total (Aluminum Production TSD
(EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–006)). The for electrolysis, rapid voltage increases types of emissions from primary
production of primary aluminum—in occur, which are termed ‘‘anode aluminum production: Process
addition to consuming large quantities effects.’’ These anode effects cause emissions of PFCs, process emissions of
of electricity—results in process-related carbon from the anode and fluorine CO2 from consumption of the anode
emissions of CO2 and two PFCs: from the dissociated molten cryolite during electrolysis (for both Prebake and
perfluoromethane (CF4) and bath to combine, thereby producing S<derberg cells), and process emissions
perfluoroethane (C2F6). Only these emissions of CF4 and C2F6. For any of CO2 from the anode baking process
process-related emissions are discussed particular individual smelter, the (for Prebake cells only).
here. Stationary fuel combustion source magnitude of emissions for a given level Another potential source of process
emissions must be monitored and of production depends on the frequency CO2 emissions is coke calcining. We
reported according to proposed 40 CFR and duration of these anode effects. As request comment on whether any U.S.
part 98, subpart C (General Stationary the frequency and duration of the anode smelters operate calcining furnaces and
Fuel Combustion Sources), which is effects increase, emissions increase. In the extent of these process emissions.
discussed in Section V.C of this addition, even at constant levels of
2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
preamble. production and anode effect minutes,
CO2 is emitted during the primary emissions vary among smelter We propose to require all owners or
aluminum smelting process when technologies (e.g., Center-Work Prebake operators of primary aluminum facilities
alumina (aluminum oxide, Al2O3) is vs. Side-Work Prebake) and among to report the total quantities of PFC and
reduced to aluminum using the Hall- individual smelters using the same CO2 process emissions. In 2006, 5
Héroult reduction process. The smelter technology due to differing companies operated 14 primary
reduction of the alumina occurs through operational practices. aluminum for at least part of the year.
electrolysis in a molten bath of natural Total U.S. Emissions. According to (One of these smelters operated only
or synthetic cryolite (Na3AlF6). The the U.S. GHG Inventory total process- briefly at the end of the year.) All
reduction cells contain a carbon lining related GHG emissions from primary primary aluminum smelters that
that serves as the cathode. Carbon is aluminum production in the U.S. are operated throughout 2006 would be
also contained in the anode, which can estimated to be 6.4 million metric tons covered at all capacity and emissions-
be a carbon mass of paste, coke CO2e in 2006. Process emissions of CO2 based thresholds considered in this
briquettes, or prebaked carbon blocks from the 14 aluminum smelters in the analysis.
from petroleum coke. During reduction, U.S. were estimated to be 3.9 million In developing the threshold for
most of the carbon in the anode is metric tons CO2e in 2006. Process primary aluminum, we considered the
oxidized and released to the atmosphere emissions of CF4 and C2F6 from emissions thresholds 1,000, 10,000,
as CO2. In addition, a smaller amount of aluminum smelters were estimated to be 25,000, and 100,000 metric tons CO2e
CO2 is released during the baking of 2.5 million metric tons CO2e in 2006. In per year (metric tons CO2e/yr). These
anodes for use in smelters using prebake 2006, 13 of the 14 primary aluminum emissions thresholds translate to 64,
technologies. smelters in the U.S. accounted for the 640, 1,594, and 6,378 metric tons
In addition to CO2 emissions, the vast majority of primary aluminum primary aluminum produced,
primary aluminum production industry emissions. The remaining smelter was respectively, based on use of the 2006
is also a source of PFC emissions. idle through most of 2006, restarting at IPCC default emission factors and
During the smelting process, if the the end of the year. assuming side-worked prebake cells and
alumina ore content of the electrolytic Emissions to be reported. We propose 100 percent capacity utilization as
bath falls below critical levels required to require reporting of the following shown in Table F–1 of this preamble.
TABLE F–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR ALUMINUM PRODUCTION BASED ON 2006 EMISSIONS AND FACILITY PRODUCTION
CAPACITY
Emission threshold level metric tons Total national Total number
CO2e/yr emissions of facilities Metric tons Percent Number Percent
CO2e/yr
1,000 ...................................................... 6,402,000 14 6,402,000 100 14 100

10,000 .................................................... 6,402,000 14 6,397,000 99.9 13 93
25,000 .................................................... 6,402,000 14 6,397,000 99.9 13 93
100,000 .................................................. 6,402,000 14 6,397,000 99.9 13 93
Production Capacity Threshold metric tons Al/year
64 ........................................................... 6,402,000 14 6,402,000 100 14 100

640 ......................................................... 6,402,000 14 6,402,000 100 14 100
1,594 ...................................................... 6,402,000 14 6,402,000 100 14 100
6,378 ...................................................... 6,402,000 14 6,402,000 100 14 100
We propose that all primary simplify the rule, avoid the need for required to report (compared to the
aluminum facilities be subject to facilities to estimate emissions to thresholds considered). Significant
reporting. All smelters that operated in determine applicability, and ensure fluctuations in capacity utilization do
2006 would be required to report if a complete coverage of emissions from occur; aluminum smelters sometimes
10,000, 25,000, or 100,000 metric tons this source category. It results in little shut down for long periods. Under the
CO2e per year threshold were used. extra burden for the industry since few proposed rule, facilities that did not
Requiring all facilities to report would if any additional facilities would be operate at all during the previous year
would still have to submit a report; operation, per the 2006 IPCC considerable improvement in the
however, reporting would be minimal. Guidelines. The following describes precision of the reported emissions.
(Zero production implies zero how to calculate CF4 and C2F6 emissions Measurement of Slope Coefficients.
emissions.) based on the slope method. CF4 We propose that slope coefficients be
For a full discussion of the threshold emissions equal the slope coefficient for measured using a method similar to the
analysis, please refer to the Aluminum CF4 (kg CF4/metric ton Al)/anode effect- USEPA/International Aluminum
Production TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– Mins/cell-day) times metal production Institute Protocol for Measurement of
0508–006). For specific information on (metric tons Al). Annual anode effect Tetrafluoromethane and
costs, including unamortized first year calculations and records should be the Hexafluoroethane from Primary
capital expenditures, please refer to sum of anode effect minutes per cell day Aluminum Production. The protocol
section 4 of the RIA and the RIA cost and production by month. C2F6 establishes guidelines to ensure that
appendix. emissions equal emissions of CF4 times measurements of smelter-specific slope-
the weight fraction of C2F6/CF4 (kg C2F6/ coefficients are consistent and accurate
kg CF4). (e.g., representative of typical smelter
Methods
operating conditions and emission
This section of this preamble provides Both the IPCC Tier 3 method and the rates). These guidelines include
monitoring methods for calculating and less accurate IPCC Tier 2 method are recommendations for documenting the
reporting process CO2 and PFC based on these equations and frequency and duration of anode effects,
emissions only. If a facility has parameters. The critical distinction measuring aluminum production,
stationary fuel combustion it would between the two methods is that the sampling design, measurement
need to also refer to proposed 40 CFR Tier 3 method requires smelter-specific instruments and methods, calculations,
part 98, subpart C for methods for CO2, slope coefficients while the Tier 2 QA/QC, and measurement frequency.
CH4 and N2O and would be required to method relies on default, technology- During the past few years, multiple
follow the calculation procedures, specific slope coefficients. Of the U.S. smelters have adopted changes to
monitoring and QA/QC methods, currently operating U.S. smelters, all but their production process which are
recordkeeping requirements as one has measured a smelter-specific likely to have changed their slope
described. coefficient at least once. However, as coefficients.66 These include the
Protocols and guidance reviewed for discussed below, some smelters may adoption of slotted anodes and
this analysis include the 2006 IPCC need to update these measurements if improvements to process control
Guidelines, EPA’s Voluntary Aluminum they occurred more than 3 years ago. algorithms. Although some U.S.
Industrial Partnership, the Inventory of Use of the Tier 3 approach smelters have recently updated their
U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and significantly improves the precision of a measurements of smelter-specific
Sinks, the International Aluminum smelter’s PFC emissions estimate. For coefficients, others may not have.
Institute’s Aluminum Sector individual facilities using the most We understand that two smelting
Greenhouse Gas Protocol, the Technical common smelter technology in the U.S., companies in the U.S., Rio Tinto Alcan
Guidelines for the Voluntary Reporting the uncertainty (95 percent confidence and Alcoa, have the necessary
of Greenhouse Gases (1605(b)) Program, interval) of estimates developed using equipment and teams in-house to
EPA’s Climate Leaders Program, and the Tier 2 approach is ±50 percent,65 measure smelter-specific slope factors.
TRI. while the uncertainty of estimates These two companies account for 11 out
The methods described in these developed using the Tier 3 approach is of 15 of the operating smelters in the
protocols and guidance coalesce around approximately ±15 percent (Aluminum U.S. The remaining facilities would
the methods described by the Production TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– need to hire a consultant to conduct a
International Aluminum Institute’s 0508–006)). For a typical U.S. smelter measurement study once every three
Aluminum Sector Greenhouse Gas emitting 175,000 metric tons CO2e in years to accurately determine their slope
Protocol and the 2006 IPCC Guidelines. PFCs, these errors result in absolute coefficients. The cost of hiring a
These methods range from Tier 1 uncertainties of ±88,000 metric tons consultant to conduct the measurement
approaches based on aluminum CO2e and ±26,000 metric tons CO2e, study is probably significantly lower
production to Tier 3 approaches based respectively. The reduction in than the capital, labor and O&M costs of
primarily on smelter-specific data. The uncertainty associated with moving the equipment, training, and
IPCC Tier 3 and International from the Tier 2 to the Tier 3 approach, maintenance required to conduct the
Aluminum Institute methods are 62,000 metric tons CO2e, is as large as measurements in-house. While the cost
essentially the same. the emissions from many of the sources to implement a Tier 3 approach is
Proposed Method for Monitoring PFC significantly greater than the cost to
that would be subject to the rule. We
Emissions. The proposed method for implement a Tier 2 approach, the
concluded the extra burden to facilities
monitoring PFC emissions from benefit of reduced uncertainty is
of measuring the smelter-specific slope
aluminum processing is similar to the considerable (approximately 40
coefficients is justified by the
Tier 3 approach in the 2006 IPCC percent), as noted above.
Guidelines for primary aluminum 65 The most common smelter technology in the We request comment on the proposal
production. The proposed method U.S. is the center-worked prebake technology. The that all smelters be required to measure
requires smelter-specific data on 2006 IPCC Guidelines provide a 95 percent their smelter-specific slope coefficients
aluminum production, anode effect confidence interval of ±6 percent for the center- at least once every three years. We
minutes per cell day (anode effect-mins/ worked prebake technology default slope
coefficient. However, this range is not the range considered, but are not proposing, to
cell-day), and recently measured slope within which the slope coefficient from a single exempt ‘‘high performing’’ smelters, as
coefficients. The slope coefficient center-worked prebake technology has a 95 percent defined by the 2006 IPCC Guidelines,
represents kg of CF4/metric ton of chance of falling. Instead, it is the range within from the requirement to measure their
aluminum produced divided by anode which the true mean of all center-worked prebake
technology slope factors has a 95 percent chance of smelter-specific slope coefficients more
effect minutes per cell-day. The cell-day falling. This appears to depart from the usual
is the number of cells operating convention for expressing the uncertainties related 66 Aluminum Production TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–
multiplied by the number of days of to the use of default coefficients in the Guidelines. 2008–0508–006).
than once. The Guidelines define ‘‘high- approach that assumes all carbon from a function of packing coke consumption
performing’’ smelters as those that net anode consumption is ultimately times baked anode production times the
operate with less than 0.2 anode effect emitted as CO2. Since the percent weight sulfur and ash content in
minutes per cell day or less than 1.4 concentrations of the non-carbon packing coke.
millivolt overvoltage. The Guidelines components are small (typically less
As is the case for CO2 emitted during
state, ‘‘no significant improvement can than one percent to five percent),
electrolysis, the IPCC Tier 2 approach
be expected in the overall facility GHG facility-specific data on them is not as
inventory by using the Tier 3 method critical to the precision of emission for anode baking relies on industry-wide
rather than the Tier 2 method.’’ (IPCC, estimates as is facility-specific data on defaults for minor anode components,
page 4.53, footnote 1). However, EPA net anode consumption. Tier 3 improves requiring smelter-specific data only for
believes there is benefit to EPA and to the accuracy of the results but the the initial weight of green anodes and
industry of periodic evaluation of the improvement in accuracy is not for baked anode production. The IPCC
correlation of the smelter-specific slope expected to exceed 5 percent per the Tier 3 approach requires smelter-
coefficient and actual emissions, even in 2006 IPCC Guidelines. Although we do specific values for all parameters. Again,
situations of low anode effect minutes not propose to require the use of the the concentrations of minor components
per cell day or overvoltage. Tier 3 approach, we would allow and are small, limiting their impact on the
The Overvoltage Method. Another encourage smelter operators to use estimate of CO2 emissions from anode
Tier 3 method included in the IPCC facility-specific data on anode non- baking. In addition, anode baking
Guidelines is the Overvoltage Method. carbon components when that data were emissions account for approximately 10
This method relates PFC emissions to an available. percent of total CO2 process emissions,
overvoltage coefficient, anode effect For prebake cells, CO2 emissions are so reducing the uncertainty in this
overvoltage, current efficiency, and equal to net prebaked anode estimate would have only a minor
aluminum production. The overvoltage consumption per metric ton aluminum impact on the overall CO2 process
method was developed for smelters times total metal production times the
estimate. For EPA’s Voluntary
using the Pechiney technology. We percent weight of sulfur and ash content
Aluminum Industrial Partnership
request comment on whether any U.S. in the baked anode times the molecular
smelters are using the Pechiney mass of CO2. program, many smelters report only
technology and, if so, on whether these CO2 emissions from S<derberg cells some smelter-specific values for the
smelters should be permitted to use the are a function of total metal production, concentrations of minor anode
Overvoltage Method. paste consumption, emissions of components. In light of these
Proposed Method for Monitoring cyclohexane soluble matter, percent considerations, we propose to require
Process CO2 Emissions. If you are binder and sulfur content in paste, the Tier 2 method for estimating CO2
required to use an existing CEMS to percent ash and hydrogen content in emissions from anode baking, with the
meet the requirements outlined in pitch, percent weight of sulfur and ash option to use facility-specific data on
proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C, you content in calcined coke, carbon in impurity concentrations when that data
would be required to use CEMS to skimmed dust from S<derberg cells, and is available.
estimate stationary fuel combustion CO2 the carbon atomic mass ratio. Other Options Considered. We are not
emissions. Where the CEMS capture all The data reported by companies
participating in EPA’s Voluntary proposing IPCC’s Tier 1 methodology
combustion- and process-related CO2
Aluminum Industrial Partnership has for calculating PFC emissions. Although
emissions you would be required to
follow the calculation procedures, generally not included smelter-specific this methodology is simple, the default
monitoring and QA/QC methods, values for each of these variables. emission factors for PFCs have large
missing data procedures, reporting However, most participants in the uncertainties due to the variability in
requirements, and recordkeeping Voluntary Aluminum Industrial anode effect frequency and duration.
requirements of proposed 40 CFR part Partnership have used either data on Since 1990, all U.S. smelters have
98, subpart C to estimate process and paste consumption (for S<derberg cells) sharply reduced their anode effect
stationary fuel combustion CO2 or on net anode consumption (for frequency and duration; through 2006,
emissions from the industrial source. Prebake cells), along with some smelter- average anode minutes per cell day have
Also, refer to proposed 40 CR part 98, specific data on impurities, to develop declined by approximately 85 percent,
subpart C to estimate combustion- a hybrid IPCC Tier 2/3 estimate (i.e., lowering U.S. smelter emission rates
related CH4 and N2O. combination of smelter-specific and well below those of the IPCC Tier 1
If your facility does not have default factors). defaults. Consequently, as discussed
stationary combustion, or if you do not CO2 emitted during anode baking. We above, the Tier 3 methodology has been
currently have CEMS that meet the propose that CO2 emitted during anode proposed.
requirements outlined in proposed 40 baking be calculated based on a mass
For CO2, we are not proposing IPCC’s
CR part 98, subpart C, or where the balance approach involving chemical
CEMS would not adequately account for contents of the anodes and packing Tier 1 methodology for calculating
process CO2 emissions, the proposed materials. No anode baking emissions emissions. The difference in uncertainty
monitoring method for process CO2 occur when using S<derberg cells, since between emission estimates developed
emissions is similar to the IPCC Tier 2 these cells are not baked before using IPCC Tier 1 and Tier 2/3
approach, which relies on industry aluminum smelting, but rather, bake in approaches for U.S. smelters is notably
defaults rather than smelter-specific the electrolysis cell during smelting. lower than the difference for the PFC
values for concentrations of minor CO2 emissions from pitch volatiles estimates. However, as part of typical
anode components. combustion equal the initial weight operations, facilities regularly monitor
CO2 emitted during electrolysis. We from green anode minus hydrogen inputs to higher Tier methods (e.g.,
propose to require that CO2 emitted content minus baked anode production consumption of anodes); consequently,
during electrolysis be calculated based minus waste tar collected times the the incremental cost to use the IPCC
on metal production and net anode molecular weight of CO2. CO2 emissions Tier 2 or a Tier 2/3 hybrid estimate are
consumption using a mass balance from bake furnace packing material are small.
4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating These records consist of values that ammonia and CO2 are used as raw
Missing Data are used to calculate the emissions and materials in the production of urea
are necessary to enable verification that (CO(NH2)2), which is another type of
Where anode effect minutes per cell
the GHG emissions monitoring and nitrogenous fertilizer that contains
day data points are missing, the average
calculations were done correctly. carbon (C) and nitrogen (N). The carbon
anode effect minutes per cell day of the
from ammonia production that is used
remaining measurements within the 6. Selection of Records That Must Be
to manufacture urea is assumed to be
same reporting period may be applied. Retained
released into the environment as CO2
These parameters are typically logged In addition to the data reported, we during urea use. Therefore, the majority
by the process control system as part of propose that facilities maintain records of CO2 emissions associated with urea
the operations of nearly all aluminium on monthly production by smelter, consumption are those that result from
production facilities and the anode effect minutes per cell-day or its use as a fertilizer. For CO2 collected
uncertainties in these data are low. anode effect overvoltage by month, and used onsite or transferred offsite,
It is likely that aluminum production facility specific emission coefficient you must follow the methodology
levels would be well known, since linked to anode effect performance, and provided in proposed 40 CFR part 98,
businesses rely on accurate monitoring net anode consumption for Prebake cells subpart PP (Suppliers of CO2).
and reporting of production levels. The or paste consumption for S<derberg Some facilities produce for sale a
2006 IPCC Guidelines specify an cells. combination of ammonia, methanol, and
uncertainty of less than 1 percent in the These records consist of data that hydrogen. We propose that facilities
data for the annual production of would be used to calculate the GHG report their process-related GHG
aluminum. The likelihood for missing emissions and are necessary to verify emissions in the source category
data is low. that the emissions monitoring and corresponding to the primary NAICS
For CO2 emissions, the uncertainty in calculations are done correctly. code for the facility. For example, a
recording anode consumption as baked facility that primarily produces
G. Ammonia Manufacturing
anode consumption or coke ammonia but also produces methanol
consumption is estimated to be only 1. Definition of the Source Category would report in the ammonia
slightly higher than for aluminium Ammonia is a major industrial manufacturing source category. Since
production, less than 2 percent per the chemical that is mainly used as CO2 is used to produce methanol, it
2006 IPCC Guidelines. This is also an fertilizer, directly applied as anhydrous does not get emitted directly into the
important parameter in smelter ammonia, or further processed into atmosphere. These facilities would
operations and is routinely/ urea, ammonium nitrates, ammonium account for the CO2 used to produce
continuously monitored. Again, the phosphates, and other nitrogen methanol through the methodology
likelihood for missing data is low. compounds. Ammonia also is used to provided in proposed 40 CFR part 98,
5. Selection of Data Reporting produce plastics, synthetic fibers and subpart G (Ammonia Manufacturing).
Requirements resins, and explosives. National emissions from ammonia
Ammonia can be produced through manufacturing were estimated to be 14.6
In addition to annual GHG emissions three processes: Steam reforming, solid million metric tons CO2 equivalent
data, facilities would be required to fuel gasification, and brine electrolysis. (<0.25 percent of U.S. GHG emissions in
submit annual aluminum production The production of ammonia typically 2006). These emissions include both
and smelter technology used. The uses conventional steam reforming or process related CO2 emissions and on-
following PFC-specific information solid fuel gasification and generates site stationary combustion emissions
would also be required to be reported on both combustion and process-related (CO2, CH4, and N2O) from 24
an annual basis: Anode effect minutes greenhouse gas emissions. The manufacturing facilities across the U.S.
per cell-day, and anode effect frequency production of ammonia through the Process-related emissions account for
and duration. Smelters would also be brine electrolysis process does not 7.6 million metric tons CO2, or 52
required to submit smelter-specific produce process GHG emissions, percent of the total, while on-site
slope coefficient; the last date when although it releases GHGs from stationary combustion emissions
smelter-specific slope coefficient was combustion of fuels to support the account for the remaining 7.0 million
measured; certification that electrolysis process. We have not metric tons CO2 equivalent emissions.
measurements of slope coefficients were identified any facilities in the U.S. For additional background
conducted in accordance with the producing ammonia through the brine information on ammonia
method identified in proposed 40 CFR electrolysis process. manufacturing, please refer to the
part 98, subpart F; and the parameters Catalytic steam reforming of ammonia Ammonia Manufacturing TSD (EPA–
used by the smelter to measure the generates process-related CO2, primarily HQ–OAR–2008–0508–007).
frequency and duration of anode effects. through the use of natural gas as a
The following CO2-specific 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
feedstock. One plant located in Kansas
information would be reported on an is manufacturing ammonia from In developing the reporting threshold
annual basis: Anode consumption for petroleum coke feedstock. This and for ammonia manufacturing, we
pre-bake cells, paste consumption for other natural gas-based and petroleum considered emissions-based thresholds
S<derberg cells, and smelter-specific coke-based feedstock processes produce of 1,000 metric tons CO2e, 10,000 metric
inputs to the CO2 process equations CO2 and hydrogen, the latter of which tons CO2e, 25,000 metric tons CO2e and
(e.g., levels of impurities) that were used is used in the manufacture of ammonia. 100,000 metric tons CO2e. Table G–1 of
in the calculation. Exact data elements Not all of the CO2 produced in the this preamble illustrates the emissions
required would vary depending on manufacture of ammonia is emitted and facilities that would be covered
smelter technology. directly to the atmosphere. Both under these various thresholds.
TABLE G–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR AMMONIA MANUFACTURING

Total national Total number
Threshold level metric tons CO2e/yr emissions of facilities Metric tons Percent Number Percent
CO2e/yr
1,000 .................................................................................... 14,543,007 24 14,543,007 100 24 100

10,000 .................................................................................. 14,543,007 24 14,543,007 100 24 100
5,000 .................................................................................... 14,543,007 24 14,543,007 100 24 100
100,000 ................................................................................ 14,543,007 24 14,449,519 99 22 92
Facility-level emissions estimates Option 3. The third option is based on specific conditions. Option 3 is
based on known plant capacities suggest the IPCC Tier 3 method for determining consistent with current feedstock
that all known facilities, except two, CO2 emissions from ammonia monitoring practices at facilities within
exceed the 100,000 metric tons CO2e manufacture. This method calculates this industry, thereby minimizing costs.
threshold. Where information was emissions based on the monthly For CO2 collected and used onsite or
available, emission estimates were measurements of the total feedstock transferred offsite, you must follow the
adjusted to account for CO2 consumed (quantity of natural gas or methodology provided in proposed 40
consumption during urea production, other feedstock) and the monthly carbon CFR part 98, subpart PP (Suppliers of
and this was taken into account in the content of the feedstock. All carbon in CO2).
threshold analysis. In order to simplify the feedstock is assumed to be oxidized In general, we decided against
the proposed rule and avoid the need to CO2. The accuracy and certainty of existing methodologies that relied on
for the source to calculate and report this approach is directly related to the default emission factors or default
whether the facility exceeds the accuracy of the feedstock usage and the values for carbon content of materials
threshold value, we propose that all carbon content of the feedstock. If the because the differences among facilities
ammonia manufacturing facilities are measurements or readings are made and could not be discerned, and such
required to report. verified according to established QA/QC default approaches are inherently
For a full discussion of the threshold methods, the resulting emission inaccurate for site-specific
analysis, please refer to the Ammonia calculations are as accurate as possible. determinations. The use of default
Manufacturing TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR– For CO2 collected and used onsite or values is more appropriate for sector-
2008–0508–007). For specific transferred offsite, you must follow the wide or national total estimates from
information on costs, including methodology provided in proposed 40 aggregated activity data than for
unamortized first year capital CFR part 98, subpart PP of this part determining emissions from a specific
expenditures, please refer to section 4 of (Suppliers of CO2). This approach is facility.
the RIA and the RIA cost appendix. also consistent with DOE’s 1605(b) ‘‘A’’ The various approaches to monitoring
rated method and TCR’s ‘‘A2’’ rated GHG emissions are elaborated in the
3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring Ammonia Manufacturing TSD (EPA–
Methods estimation methods.
Option 4. The fourth option is using HQ–OAR–2008–0508–007).
Many domestic and international
CEMS to directly measure CO2 4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating
monitoring guidelines and protocols
include methodologies for estimating emissions. While this method does tend Missing Data
both combustion and process-related to provide the most accurate emissions The proposed rule requires the use of
emissions from ammonia manufacturing measurements, it is likely the costliest substitute data whenever a quality-
(e.g., 2006 IPCC Guidelines, U.S. of all the monitoring methods. assured value of a parameter that is used
Inventory, DOE 1605(b), and TCR). Proposed Option. Under the proposed to calculate GHG emissions is
These methodologies coalesce around rule, if you are required to use an unavailable, or ‘‘missing.’’ For missing
the following four options which we existing CEMS to meet the requirements feedstock supply rates, use the lesser of
considered for quantifying emissions outlined in proposed 40 CFR part 98, the maximum supply rate that the unit
from ammonia manufacture: subpart C and the CEMS capture all is capable of processing or the
Option 1. The first method found in combustion- and process-related CO2 maximum supply rate that the meter can
existing protocols estimates emissions emissions you would be required to measure. There are no missing data
by applying a default emission factor to follow requirements of proposed 40 CFR procedures for carbon content. A re-test
total ammonia produced. This approach part 98, subpart C to estimate CO2 must be performed if the data from any
estimates only process-related emissions from the industrial source. monthly measurements are determined
emissions. This approach is consistent For facilities that do not currently to be invalid.
with IPCC Tier 1 and DOE 1605(b) ‘‘C’’ have CEMS that meet the requirements
outlined in proposed 40 CFR part 98, 5. Selection of Data Reporting
rated estimation methods.
Option 2. A second method consists subpart C, or where the CEMS does not Requirements
of performing a mass balance measure CO2 process emissions, the We propose that facilities that
calculation using default carbon content proposed monitoring method is Option estimate their process CO2 emissions
values for feedstock (from the U.S. 3. You would be required to follow the under proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart
DOE). Using default carbon content for requirements of proposed 40 CFR part G, submit their process CO2 emissions
fuel would not provide the same level 98, subpart C to estimate CO2, CH4 and data and the following additional data
of accuracy as using facility-specific N2O emissions from stationary on an annual basis. These data are the
carbon contents. This approach is combustion. basis for calculations and are needed for
consistent with IPCC Tier 2, DOE The proposed monitoring method is us to understand the emissions data and
1605(b) and TCR’s ‘‘B’’ rated estimation Option 3. Options 3 and 4 provide the verify the reasonableness of the reported
methods. most accurate estimates from site- emissions. We propose facilities submit
the following data on an annual basis cement plants are located near large collection equipment and can either be
for each process unit: The total quantity limestone deposits. CO2 from the recycled back to the kiln or be sent
of feedstock consumed for ammonia chemical process of cement production offsite for disposal, depending on its
manufacturing, the monthly analyses of is the second largest source of industrial quality. Organic carbon in raw materials
carbon content for each feedstock used CO2 emissions in the U.S. is also emitted as CO2 as raw material
in ammonia manufacturing. A full list of During the cement production is heated.
data to be reported is included in process, calcium carbonate (CaCO3) National GHG emissions from cement
proposed 40 CFR part 98, subparts A (usually from limestone and chalk) is production were estimated to be 86.83
and G. combined with silica-containing million metric tons CO2e in 2006. These
materials (such as sand and shale) and emissions include both process-related
6. Selection of Records That Must Be is heated in a cement kiln at a
Retained emissions (CO2) and on-site stationary
temperature of about 1,450 °C (2,400 °F). combustion emissions (CO , CH , and
2 4
We propose that each ammonia The CaCO3 forms calcium oxide (or N2O) from 107 cement production
manufacturing facility maintain records CaO) and CO2 in a process known as facilities. Process-related emissions
of monthly carbon content analyses, and calcination or calcining. Very small account for over half of emissions (45.7
the method used to determine the amounts of carbonates other than million metric tons CO2), while on-site
quantity of feedstock used. These CaCO3, such as magnesium carbonates stationary combustion emissions
records consist of values that are and non-carbonate organic carbon may account for the remaining 41.1 million
directly used to calculate the emissions also be present in the raw materials,
metric tons CO2e emissions.
that are reported and are necessary to both of which contribute to generation
of additional CO2. The product from the For additional background
enable verification that the GHG information on cement production,
emissions monitoring and calculations cement kiln is clinker, an intermediate
product, and the CO2 generated as a by- please refer to the Cement Production
were done correctly. TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–008).
product. The CO2 is released to the
H. Cement Production atmosphere. 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
1. Definition of the Source Category Additional CO2 emissions are
generated with the formation of partially In developing the threshold for
Hydraulic Portland cement, the calcinated cement kiln dust. During cement manufacturing, we considered
primary product of the cement industry, clinker production, some of the clinker emissions-based thresholds of 1,000
is a fine gray or white powder produced precursor materials (instead of forming metric tons CO2e, 10,000 metric tons
by heating a mixture of limestone, clay, clinker) are entrained in the flue gases CO2e, 25,000 metric tons CO2e, and
and other ingredients at high exiting the kiln as non-calcinated, 100,000 metric tons CO2e. Table H–1 of
temperature. Limestone is the single partially calcinated, or fully calcinated this preamble illustrates the emissions
largest ingredient required in the cement kiln dust 67. Cement Kiln Dust is and facilities that would be covered
cement-making process, and most collected from the flue gas in dust under these thresholds.
TABLE H–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR CEMENT MANUFACTURING

Emissions Covered Facilities Covered
Total
national Total number
Threshold level metric tons CO2e/yr Million
emissions of facilities metric tons Percent Number Percent
(MMTCO2e) CO2e/yr
1,000 ............................................................................ 86.83 107 86.83 100 107 100

10,000 .......................................................................... 86.83 107 86.83 100 107 100
25,000 .......................................................................... 86.83 107 86.83 100 107 100
100,000 ........................................................................ 86.83 107 86.74 99.9 106 99.9
All emissions thresholds examined increasing the number of facilities that 3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring
covered over 99.9 percent of CO2e must report and simplifies the rule. Methods
emissions from cement facilities. Only For a full discussion of the threshold
one plant out of 107 in the dataset Many domestic and international
analysis, please refer to the Cement GHG monitoring guidelines and
would be excluded by a 100,000 metric Production TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–
tons CO2e threshold. All facilities would protocols include methodologies for
0508–008). For specific information on estimating process-related emissions
be included under a 25,000 metric tons costs, including unamortized first year from cement manufacturing (e.g., the
CO2e threshold. Therefore, EPA is capital expenditures, please refer to 2006 IPCC Guidelines, U.S. Inventory,
proposing that all cement production section 4 of the RIA and the RIA cost DOE 1605(b), CARB mandatory GHG
facilities are required to report. Having appendix. emissions reporting program, EPA’s
no threshold covers all of the cement Climate Leaders, the EU Emissions
production process emissions without Trading System, and the Cement
Sustainability Initiative Protocol). These
67 Cement Production TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–
2008–0508–008).
methodologies coalesce around four production would be based on the readily available to develop site-specific
different options. percent of measured carbonate content emission factors.
Option 1. Apply a default emission in the clinker (measured on a monthly In some protocols, this method
factor to the total quantity of clinker basis) and the fraction of calcination requires correcting for purchases and
produced at the facility. The quantity of achieved. The clinker emission factor is sales of clinker, such that a facility is
clinker produced could be directly then multiplied by the monthly clinker only accounting for emissions from the
measured, or a clinker fraction could be production to estimate monthly process- clinker that is manufactured on site.
applied to the total quantity of cement related CO2 emissions from cement This approach provides better emissions
produced. production. Annual emissions are data than protocols where the method
Option 2. Apply site-specific emission calculated by summing CO2 emissions does not correct for clinker purchases
factors to the quantity of clinker over 12 months across all kilns at the and sales. In some protocols, the
produced. facility. method requires reporters to start with
Option 3. Measure the carbonate Most current protocols propose this cement production, estimate the clinker
inputs to the furnace. Under this ‘‘kiln method, but allow facilities to apply a fraction, and then estimate the
input’’ approach, emissions are national default emission factor. We carbonate input used to produce the
calculated by weighing the mass of propose the development of a facility- clinker. Conceptually, this might not be
individual carbonate species sent to the specific emission factor based on the any different than the kiln input
kiln, multiplying by the emissions factor understanding that facilities analyze the approach as the facility would
(relating CO2 emissions to carbonate carbonate contents of their raw ultimately have to identify and quantify
content in the kiln feed), and materials to the kiln on a frequent basis, the carbonate inputs to the kiln.
subtracting for uncalcined cement kiln either on a daily basis or every time The kiln input approach was
dust. there is a change in the raw material considered, but not proposed, because it
Option 4. Direct measurement of mix. would not lead to significantly reduced
emissions using CEMS. Cement Kiln Dust. The CO2 emissions uncertainty in the emissions estimate
Proposed Option. Based on the attributable to calcined material in the over the clinker based approach, where
agency’s review of the above cement kiln dust not recycled back to a site-specific emission factor is
approaches, we propose two different the kiln must be added to the estimate developed using periodic sampling of
methods for quantifying GHG emissions of CO2 emissions from clinker the carbonate mix into the kiln. The
from cement manufacturing, depending production. To establish a cement kiln primary difference is the proposed
on current emissions monitoring at the dust adjustment factor, we propose that clinker-based approach requires a
facility. facilities conduct a chemical analysis on monthly analysis of the degree of
CEMS Method. Under the proposed a quarterly basis to estimate the plant- calcination achieved in the clinker in
rule, if you are required to use an specific fraction of uncalcined carbonate order to develop the facility-specific
existing CEMS to meet the requirements in the cement kiln dust from each kiln, emissions factor, whereas the kiln input
outlined in proposed 40 CFR part 98, that is not recycled to the kiln each approach would require monthly
subpart C, you would be required to use quarter. Again, this method provides monitoring of the inputs and outputs of
CEMS to estimate CO2 emissions. Where reasonable accuracy and is highly the kiln. We concluded that although
the CEMS capture all combustion- and consistent with the prevailing methods the kiln input does not improve
process-related CO2 emissions you presented in existing protocols. certainty estimates significantly, it
would be required to follow the TOC Content in Raw Materials. The could potentially be more costly
requirements of proposed 40 CFR part CO2 emissions attributable to the TOC depending on the carbonate input
98, subpart C to estimate all CO2 content in raw material must be added sampling frequency.
emissions from the industrial source. to the estimate of CO2 emissions from Early domestic and international
Also, refer to proposed 40 CFR part 98, clinker production and cement kiln guidance documents for estimating
subpart C (discussed in Section V.C of dust. We propose that facilities conduct process CO2 emissions from cement
this preamble) to estimate combustion- an annual chemical analysis to production offered the option of
related CH4 and N2O. determine the organic content of the raw applying a default emission factor to
Calculation Method (Option 2). For material on an annual basis. The cement production (e.g. IPCC Tier 1,
facilities that do not currently have emissions are calculated from the TOC DOE 1605(b) ‘‘C’’ rated approach). This
CEMS that meet the requirements content by multiplying the organic is no longer considered an acceptable
outlined in proposed 40 CFR part 98, content by the amount of raw material method in national inventories therefore
subpart C, or where the CEMS would consumed annually. we did not consider it further for
not adequately account for process Other Options Considered. We developing a mandatory GHG reporting
emissions, we propose that these considered three alternative options to rule.
facilities calculate emissions following estimate process-related emissions from The various approaches to monitoring
Option 2 outlined below. You would be cement production. The first method GHG emissions are elaborated in the
required to follow the requirements of considered was to apply default Cement Production TSD (EPA–HQ–
proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C to emission factors to clinker production OAR–2008–0508–008).
estimate emissions of CO2, CH4 and N2O (either based on measurement of
from stationary combustion. The cement clinker, or by applying a clinker fraction 4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating
production section provides only those to cement production). Applying default Missing Data
procedures for calculating and reporting emission factors to clinker production is For facilities with CEMs, we propose
process-related emissions. one of the most common approaches in that facilities follow the missing data
Under Option 2, we propose that existing protocols. However, we have procedures in proposed 40 CFR part 98,
facilities develop facility-specific determined that applying default subpart C, which are also discussed in
emission factors relating CO2 emissions emission factors to clinker production is Section V.C of this preamble.
to clinker production for each more appropriate for national-level For facilities without CEMs, we
individual kiln. The emission factor emissions estimates than facility- propose that no missing data procedures
relating CO2 emissions to clinker specific estimates, where data are would apply because the emission
factors used to estimate CO2 emissions of the raw material, and the amount of such as PFCs, HFCs, SF6, and NF3
from clinker and cement kiln dust raw material consumed annually. These during manufacturing of
production are derived from routine data, used as the basis of the semiconductors, liquid crystal displays
tests of carbonate contents. In the event calculations, are needed for EPA to (LCDs), microelectrical mechanical
data on carbonate content analysis is understand the emissions data and systems (MEMs), and photovoltaic cells
missing we propose that the facility verify reasonableness of the reported (PV). We are also seeking comment
undertake a new analysis of carbonate emissions. A full list of data to be below on the inclusion of light-emitting
contents. We are not proposing any reported is included in proposed 40 diodes (LEDs), disk readers and other
missing data allowance for clinker and CFR part 98, subparts A and H. products as part of the electronics
cement kiln dust production data. The
6. Selection of Records That Must Be manufacturing source category.
likelihood for missing input, clinker and
cement kiln dust production data is low, Retained The fluorinated gases (at room
as businesses closely track their In addition to the data reported, we temperature) are used for plasma
purchase of production inputs, quantity propose that facilities using the clinker- etching of silicon materials and cleaning
of clinker produced, and quantity of based approach to calculate emissions deposition tool chambers. Additionally,
cement kiln dust discarded. keep records of monthly carbonate semiconductor manufacturing employs
5. Selection of Data Reporting consumption, monthly cement fluorinated GHGs (typically liquids at
Requirements production, monthly clinker room temperature) as heat transfer
production, results from monthly fluids. The most common fluorinated
We propose that facilities submit chemical analysis of carbonates, GHGs in use are HFC–23, CF4, C2F6, NF3
annual CO2 emissions from cement documentation of calculated site and SF6, although other compounds
production, as well as any stationary specific clinker emission factor, such as perfluoropropane (C3F8) and
fuel combustion emissions. In addition, quarterly cement kiln dust production, perfluorocyclobutane (c-C4F8) are also
facilities using CEMS would be required total annual fraction calcination
to follow the data reporting used (EPA, 2008a).
achieved, organic carbon content of the
requirements in proposed 40 CFR part Electronics manufacturers may also
raw material, and the amount of raw
98, subpart C. Facilities using the use N2O as the oxygen source for
material consumed annually. These
clinker-based approach would be records include values directly used to chemical vapor deposition of silicon
required to report annual clinker calculate the reported emissions; and oxynitride or silicon dioxide. Besides
production, annual cement kiln dust dielectric film etching and chamber
these records are necessary to verify the
production, number of kilns, site- cleaning, much smaller quantities of
estimated GHG emissions. A full list of
specific clinker emission factor, the total fluorinated gases are used to etch
records that must be retained onsite is
annual fraction of cement kiln dust polysilicon films and refractory metal
included in proposed 40 CFR part 98,
recycled to the kiln, and the quantity of films like tungsten. Table I–1 of this
subparts A and H.
CO2 captured for use and the end use, preamble presents the fluorinated GHGs
if known. In addition, we propose that I. Electronics Manufacturing typically used during manufacture of
facilities submit their annual analysis of each of these electronics devices.
1. Definition of the Source Category
carbonate composition, the total annual
fraction of calcination achieved (for The electronics industry uses
each carbonate), organic carbon content multiple long-lived fluorinated GHGs
TABLE I–1. FLUORINATED GHGS USED BY THE ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY

Product type Fluorinated GHGs used during manufacture
Electronics (e.g., Semiconductor, MEMS, LCD, PV) .. CF4, C2F6, C3F8, c–C4F8, c–C4F8O, C4F6, C5F8, CHF3, CH2F2, NF3, SF6, and Heat Trans-
fer Fluids (CF3–(O–CF(CF3)–CF2)n–(O–CF2)m–O–CF3, CnF2n+2, CnF2n+1(O)
CmF2m+1, CnF2nO, (CnF2n+1)3N)a.
a IPCC Guidelines do not specify the fluorinated GHGs used by the MEMs industry. Literature reviews revealed that CF , SF , and the Bosch
4 6
process (consisting of alternating steps of SF6 and c–C4F8) are used to manufacture MEMs. For further information, see the Electronics Manu-
facturing TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–009).
The etching process uses plasma- from chamber walls, electrodes, and Fluorinated GHG liquids (at room
generated fluorine atoms, which chamber hardware. Undissociated temperature) such as fully fluorinated
chemically react with exposed dielectric fluorinated gases and other products linear, branched or cyclic alkanes,
film to selectively remove the desired pass from the chamber to waste streams ethers, tertiary amines and aminoethers,
portions of the film. The material and, unless emission control systems and mixtures thereof are used as heat
removed as well as undissociated are employed, into the atmosphere. transfer fluids at several semiconductor
fluorinated gases flow into waste facilities to cool process equipment,
In addition to emissions of unreacted control temperature during device
streams and, unless emission control gases, some fluorinated compounds can
systems are employed, into the testing, and solder semiconductor
also be transformed in the plasma devices to circuit boards. The
atmosphere. processes into different fluorinated fluorinated heat transfer fluid’s high
Chambers used for depositing GHGs which are then exhausted, unless vapor pressures can lead to evaporative
dielectric films are cleaned periodically abated, into the atmosphere. For losses during use.68 We are seeking
using fluorinated and other gases. example, when C2F6 is used in cleaning comment on the extent of use and
During the cleaning cycle the gas is or etching, CF4 is generated and emitted
converted to fluorine atoms in plasma, as a process by-product. 68 Electronics Manufacturing TSD (EPA–HQ–
which etches away residual material OAR–2008–0508–009); 2006 IPCC Guidelines.
annual replacement quantities of MEMs. Emissions of fluorinated GHGs 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
fluorinated liquids as heat transfer from 12 facilities were estimated to be
fluids in other electronics sectors, such 0.03 million metric tons CO2e in 2006. For manufacture of semiconductors,
as their use for cooling or cleaning LCDs. Emissions of fluorinated GHGs LCDs, and MEMs, we are proposing
during LCD manufacture. from 9 facilities were estimated to be capacity-based thresholds equivalent to
Total U.S. Emissions. Emissions of 0.02 million metric tons CO2e in 2006. an annual emissions threshold of 25,000
fluorinated GHGs from an estimated 216 PVs. Emissions of fluorinated GHGs metric tons CO2e. For manufacture of
electronics facilities were estimated to from 20 PV facilities were estimated to PVs for which we have less information
be 6.1 million metric tons CO2e in 2006. be 0.07 million metric tons CO2e in on use and emissions of fluorinated
Below is a breakdown of emissions by 2006. We request comment on the GHGs, we are proposing an emissions
electronics product type. number and capacity of thin film (i.e., threshold of 25,000 metric tons of CO2e.
Semiconductors. Emissions of amorphous silicon) and other PV We are seeking comment on the
fluorinated GHGs, including heat manufacturing facilities in the U.S. inclusion of LEDs, disk readers and
transfer fluids, from 175 semiconductor using fluorinated GHGs. other products in the electronics
facilities were estimated to be 5.9 Emissions To Be Reported. This manufacturing source category. Given
million metric tons CO2e in 2006. Of the section details our proposed that the manufacturing process for these
total estimated semiconductor requirements for reporting fluorinated devices is similar to other electronics,
emissions, 5.4 million metric tons CO2e GHG and N2O emissions from the we are specifically interested in seeking
are from etching/chamber cleaning and following processes and activities:
0.5 million metric tons CO2e are from feedback on the level of emissions from
(1) Plasma etching; their manufacturer and whether
heat transfer fluid usage. Partners of the (2) Chamber cleaning;
PFC Reduction/Climate Partnership for subjecting these products to an
(3) Chemical vapor deposition using
Semiconductors comprise emissions threshold of 25,000 metric
N2O as the oxygen source; and
approximately 80 percent of U.S. ton CO2e would be appropriate.
(4) Heat transfer fluid use.
semiconductor production capacity. Our understanding is that only In our analysis, we considered
These partners have committed to semiconductor facilities use heat emission thresholds of 1,000 metric tons
reduce their emissions (exclusive of transfer fluids; we request comment on CO2e, 10,000 metric tons CO2e, 25,000
heat transfer fluid emissions) to 10 this assumption. metric tons CO2e, and 100,000 metric
percent below their 1995 levels by 2010, For additional background tons CO2e per year. Table I–2 of this
and their emissions have been on a information on the electronics industry, preamble shows emissions and facilities
general decline toward attainment of refer to the Electronics Manufacturing that would be captured by the
this goal since 1999. TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–009). respective emissions thresholds.
TABLE I–2. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY

Emission threshold level metric tons Total national Total number
CO2e/yr emissions of facilities Metric tons Percent Facilities Percent
CO2e/yr
1,000 ...................................................... 5,984,462 216 5,972,909 99.8 173 80

10,000 .................................................... 5,984,462 216 5,840,411 98 118 55
25,000 .................................................... 5,984,462 216 5,708,283 95 96 44
100,000 .................................................. 5,984,462 216 4,708,283 79 54 25
We selected the 25,000 metric tons determination. Therefore, we derived capacity-based thresholds are 1,000 m2
CO2e per year threshold because this production capacity thresholds that are silicon for semiconductors; 4,000 m2
threshold maximizes emissions approximately equivalent to metric tons silicon for MEMs; and 236,000 m2 LCD
reporting, while excluding small CO2e using IPCC Tier 1 default for LCDs. Table I–3 of this preamble
facilities that do not contribute emissions factors and assuming 100 shows the estimated emissions and
significantly to the overall GHG percent capacity utilization. Where number of facilities that would report
emissions. IPCC Tier 1 default factors were for each source under the proposed
We propose to use a production-based unavailable (i.e., MEMs), the emissions capacity-based thresholds. PV is not
threshold based on the rated capacities
factor was estimated based on those of shown in the table because we are
of facilities, as opposed to an emissions-
semiconductors for the relevant proposing an emissions threshold due to
based threshold, where possible,
fluorinated GHGs. The proposed lack of information.
because it simplifies the applicability
TABLE I–3. SUMMARY OF RULE APPLICABILITY UNDER THE PROPOSED CAPACITY-BASED THRESHOLDS
Total Emissions covered Facilities covered
emissions
Capacity-based Total national
Emissions source of source
threshold facilities Metric tons
(metric tons Percent Facilities Percent
CO2e) CO2e/yr
Semi-conductors ... 1,080 silicon m2 .... 175 5,741,676 5,492,066 96 91 52

MEMs .................... 1,020 silicon m2 .... 12 146,115 96,164 66 2 17
LCD ....................... 235,700 LCD m2 ... 9 23,632 0 0 0 0
The proposed capacity-based expenditures, please refer to section 4 of from tool manufacturers and can also be
thresholds are estimated to cover about the RIA and the RIA cost appendix. experimentally measured on-site at the
50 percent of semiconductor facilities facility. We propose that the DRE for
and between 0 percent and 20 percent abatement equipment be experimentally
Methods
of the facilities manufacturing MEMs measured using the protocol described
and LCDs. At the same time, the a. Etching and Cleaning Emissions below.
thresholds are expected to cover nearly Fluorinated GHG Emissions. Under The guidance prepared by
96 percent of fluorinated GHG the proposed rule, large semiconductor International SEMATECH Technology
emissions from semiconductor facilities, facilities (defined as facilities with Transfer #0612485A–ENG (December
and 0 percent and 66 percent of annual capacities of greater than 10,500 2006) must be followed when preparing
fluorinated GHG emissions from m2 silicon) would be required to gas utilization and by-product formation
facilities manufacturing LCDs and estimate their fluorinated GHG measurements. We have determined
MEMs, respectively. Combined these emissions from etching and cleaning that electronics manufacturers
emissions are estimated to account for using an approach based on the IPCC commonly track fluorinated GHG
close to 94 percent of fluorinated GHG Tier 3 method, and all other facilities consumption using flow metering
emissions from electronics as a whole. would be required to use an approach systems calibrated to ±1 percent or
We are proposing capacity-based based on the IPCC Tier 2b method. We better accuracy. Thus the equation for
thresholds for the electronics industry, have determined that large estimating emissions does not account
where possible, because electronics semiconductor facilities are already for cylinder heels. However, a facility
manufacturers may employ emissions using Tier 3 methods and/or have the may choose to estimate consumption by
control equipment (e.g., thermal necessary data readily available either weighing fluorinated GHG cylinders
oxidizers, fluorinated GHG capture in-house or from suppliers to apply the when placed into and taken out of
recycle systems) to lower their highest tier method. The difference service, as is common practice by the
fluorinated GHG emissions. In addition, between the proposed approaches and magnesium industry.
capacity-based thresholds would permit the IPCC methods is that the proposed The use of the IPCC Tier 3 method
facilities to quickly determine whether approaches include stricter and standard site-specific DRE
or not they must report under this rule. requirements for quantifying the gas measurement would provide the most
When abatement equipment is used, destroyed by abatement equipment, as certain and practical emission estimates
electronics manufacturers often estimate described below. None of the IPCC for large facilities. The uncertainty
their emissions using the manufacturer- methods require a standard protocol to associated with an IPCC Tier 3 approach
published DRE for the equipment. estimate DREs of abatement equipment. is lower than any of the other IPCC
However, abatement equipment may fail Given that the actual DRE of the
to achieve its rated DRE either because approaches, and is on the order of ±30
abatement equipment can be percent at the 95 percent confidence
it is not being properly operated and significantly smaller (by up to a factor
maintained or because the DRE itself interval. We estimate that the Tier 3
of 50) compared to the manufacturer approach would not impose a
was incorrectly measured due to a rated DRE, we are proposing verification
failure to account for the effects of significant burden on facilities because
of the DREs using a standard reporting large semiconductor facilities are
dilution. (For example, CF4 can be off by protocol (Burton, 2007).
as much as a factor of 20 to 50 and C2F6 already using Tier 3 methods and/or
Under the proposed rule, we estimate have the necessary data to do so readily
can be off by a factor of up to 10 because that 17 percent of all semiconductor
of failure to properly account for available, as noted above.
manufacturing facilities would be Method for Other Semiconductor,
dilution.) In either event, the actual required to report using an IPCC Tier 3
emissions from facilities employing LCD, MEMS, and PV Facilities. The
approach (equivalent to 29 facilities out IPCC Tier 2b approach is based on gas
abatement equipment may exceed of 175 total facilities) and that 56
estimates based on the rated DREs of consumption by process type (i.e., etch
percent of total semiconductor or chamber clean) multiplied by default
this equipment and may therefore emissions (equivalent 3.4 million metric
exceed the 25,000 metric tons CO2e factors for utilization, by-product
tons CO2e out of a total 5.9 million formation, and destruction. We are
threshold without the knowledge of the metric tons CO2e emissions) would be
facility operators. Measuring and proposing that site-specific DRE
reported using the IPCC Tier 3 measurements be used for quantifying
reporting emission control device approach.
performance is therefore important for the amount of gas destroyed. The DRE
Method for Large Facilities. The IPCC measurements would be determined
developing an accurate estimate of Tier 3 approach uses company-specific
emissions. As discussed below, we using the protocol described below.
data on (1) gas consumption, (2) gas
propose an emission estimation method The Tier 2b approach does not
utilization, (3) by-product formation,
that would account for destruction by account for variation among individual
and (4) DRE for all emission abatement
abatement equipment only if facilities processes or tools and, therefore, the
processes at the facility.
verified the performance of their estimated emissions have an uncertainty
Information on gas consumption by
abatement equipment using one of two about twice as high as that of IPCC Tier
process is often gathered as business as
methods. If facilities choose not to 3 estimates. However, we have
usual,69 and information on gas
verify the performance of their concluded that the IPCC Tier 3 method
utilization, by-product formation, and
abatement equipment, the estimation would be unduly burdensome to the
DRE for each process is readily available
method would not account for any estimated 146 facilities with annual
destruction by the abatement device. 69 In the RIA for this rulemaking, we have production less than 10,500 m2 silicon.
For additional background conservatively included the costs of gathering, We estimate that the IPCC Tier 2b
information on the threshold analysis, consolidating, and checking process-specific gas approach would not impose a
refer to the Electronics Manufacturing consumption information. However, we believe that significant burden on facilities because
this information is already gathered in many cases
TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–009). for purposes of internal process control and/or
it requires only minimal fluorinated gas
For specific information on costs, emissions reporting under EPA’s voluntary PFC usage tracking by major production
including unamortized first year capital Reduction Program for the Semiconductor Industry. process type. These production input
data are readily available at all U.S. in different proportions). We request the 95 percent confidence interval.70
manufacturing facilities. comment on the likelihood and Facilities routinely monitor gas
N2O Emissions. We are proposing that potential severity of such errors and on consumption as part of business as
electronics manufacturers use a simple how they might be avoided. usual, making it technically feasible to
mass-balance approach to estimate Facilities pursuing either DRE employ a method of at least IPCC Tier
emissions of N2O during etching and verification method would also be 2a complexity or higher without
chamber cleaning. This methodology required to use the equipment within additional data collection efforts.
assumes N2O is not converted or the manufacturer’s specified equipment The Tier 2a approach is based on the
destroyed during etching or chamber lifetime, operate the equipment within gas consumption multiplied by default
cleaning, due to lack of N2O utilization manufacturer specified limits for the gas factors for utilization, by-product
data. We request comment on utilization mix and exhaust flow rate intended for formation, and destruction. The Tier 2a
factors for N2O during etching and fluorinated GHG destruction, and approach is relatively simple, given that
chamber cleaning, and any data on N2O maintain the equipment according to gas consumption data is collected as
by-product formation. the manufacturer’s guidelines. We part of business as usual. However, due
Verification of DRE. For facilities that request comment on these proposed to variation in gas utilization between
employ abatement devices and wish to requirements. etching and cleaning processes, the
reflect the emission reductions due to estimated emissions using Tier 2a have
these devices in their emissions b. Emissions of Heat Transfer Fluids
greater uncertainty than Tier 2b
estimates, two methods are proposed for We propose that electronics estimated emissions.
verifying the DRE of the equipment. manufacturers use the IPCC Tier 2 Tier 2b/3 hybrid approach involves
Either method may be followed. approach, which is a mass-balance requiring Tier 3 reporting for all
The first method would require approach, to estimate the emissions of facilities, but only for the top three gases
facilities (or their equipment suppliers) each fluorinated heat transfer fluid. The emitted at each facility. For all other
to test the DRE of the equipment using IPCC Tier 2 approach uses company- gases, the Tier 2b approach would be
an industry standard protocol, such as specific data and accounts for required. The top three gases emitted,
the one under development by EPA as differences among facilities’ heat based on data in the Inventory of U.S.
part of the PFC Reduction/Climate transfer fluids (which vary in their GHG Emissions and Sinks, are C2F6,
Partnership for Semiconductors (not yet GWPs), leak rates, and service practices. CF4, and SF6 (EPA, 2008a). These top
published). This draft protocol requires It has an uncertainty on the order of ±20 three gases accounted for approximately
facilities to experimentally determine percent at the 95 percent confidence 80 percent of total fluorinated GHG
the effective dilution through the interval according to the 2006 IPCC emissions from semiconductor
abatement device and to measure Guidelines. The Tier 2 approach is manufacturing during etching and
abatement DRE during actual or preferable to the IPCC Tier 1 approach, chamber cleaning in 2006. The
simulated process conditions. The which relies on a default emissions uncertainty associated with the Tier
second method would require facilities factor to estimate heat transfer fluid 2b/3 hybrid approach has not been
to buy equipment that has been tested emissions and has relatively high determined, but is estimated to be
by an independent third party (e.g., UL) uncertainty compared to the Tier 2 between the uncertainty for a Tier 2b
using an industry standard protocol approach. and Tier 3 approach.
such as the one under development by We did not select the Tier 1 and Tier
EPA. Under this approach, c. Review of Existing Reporting
Programs and Methodologies 2a methods due to the greater
manufacturers would pay the third uncertainty inherent in these
party to select random samples of each We reviewed the PFC Reduction/ approaches. Although the Tier 2b/3
model and test them. Because testing Climate Partnership for the hybrid approach would provide more
would not need to be obtained for every Semiconductor Industry, U.S. GHG accurate emissions estimates for small
piece of equipment sold, this approach Inventory, 1605(b), EPA Climate facilities, we concluded that the Tier 2b
would probably be less expensive than Leaders, WRI, TRI, and the World method with site-specific DRE
in-house testing by electronics Semiconductor Council methods for measurements would provide sufficient
manufacturers, but it may not capture estimating etching and cleaning accuracy without the additional
the full range of conditions under which emissions. All of the methods draw monitoring and recordkeeping
the abatement equipment would from both the 2000 and 2006 IPCC requirements of the Tier 3 method.
actually be used. Guidelines. We propose collecting emissions data
We believe that the proposed DRE Etching and Cleaning. For etching and from MEMS manufacturers meeting the
measurement method is generally cleaning emissions, we considered the threshold criterion although no IPCC
robust, but we are requesting comment 2006 IPCC Tier 1 and Tier 2a methods, default emission factors exist for MEMs
on one aspect of that method. We are as well as a Tier 2b/3 hybrid which and the IPCC emission factors for
concerned that the DREs measured and would apply Tier 3 to the most heavily semiconductor and LCD manufacturing
calculated for CF4 may vary depending used fluorinated GHGs in all facilities. may not be reliable for MEMs.
on the mix of input gases used in the The Tier 1 approach is based on the
Therefore, we are seeking information
electronics manufacturing process. The surface area of substrate (e.g., silicon,
on emissions and emission factors for
calculated DRE for CF4 may be LCD or PV-cell) produced during
both MEMs and LCD manufacturing.
influenced by the formation of CF4 from manufacture multiplied by a default gas- Heat Transfer Fluids. For heat transfer
other PFCs during the destruction specific emission factor. The advantages fluid emissions, we reviewed both the
process itself, and different input gases of the Tier 1 approach lie in its IPCC Tier 1 and IPCC Tier 2 approaches.
have different CF4 byproduct formation simplicity. However, this method does The Tier 1 approach for heat transfer
rates. This means that a DRE for CF4 not account for the differences among fluid emissions is based on the
calculated using one set of input gases process types (i.e., etching versus
might over- or under-estimate CF4 cleaning), individual processes, or tools, 70 This uncertainty refers only to semiconductors
emissions when applied to another set leading to uncertainties in the default and LCDs. Tier 1 emission factor uncertainty for PV
of input gases (or even the original set emission factors of up to 200 percent at was not estimated in the 2006 IPCC Guidelines.
utilization capacity of the used for gas utilization, by-product Proposed requirements for stationary
semiconductor facility multiplied by a formation and their sources/ fuel combustion emissions are set forth
default emission factor. Although the uncertainties, emission control in proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C.
Tier 1 approach has the advantages of technology DREs and their Proposed requirements for landfill
simplicity, it is less accurate than the uncertainties, fraction of gas fed into emissions are set forth in Section V.HH
Tier 2 approach according to the 2006 each process type with emissions, of this preamble. Data is unavailable on
IPCC Guidelines. control technologies, description of landfilling at ethanol facilities, but it is
abatement controls, inputs in the mass- our understanding that some of these
4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating
balance equation (for heat transfer fluid
Missing Data facilities may have landfills with
emissions), example calculation, and
Where facility-specific process gas significant CH4 emissions. For more
emissions uncertainty estimate.
utilization rates and by-product gas These data form the basis of the information on landfills at industrial
formation rates are missing, facilities calculations and are needed for us to facilities, please refer to the Ethanol
can estimate etching/cleaning emissions understand the emissions data and Production TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–
by applying defaults from the next verify the reasonableness of the reported 0508–010). EPA is seeking comment on
lower Tier (e.g., IPCC Tier 2b or Tier 2a) emissions. available data sources for landfilling
to estimate missing data. However, practices at ethanol production
6. Selection of Records That Must Be facilities.
facilities must limit their use of defaults
Retained
from the next lower Tier to less than 5 The wastewater generated at ethanol
percent of their emissions estimate. We propose that facilities keep production facilities is handled in a
Default values for estimating DRE records of the following: Data actually variety of ways, with dry milling and
would not be permitted. DRE values used to estimate emissions, records wet milling facilities generally treating
must be estimated as zero in the absence supporting values used to estimate wastewaters differently. In 2006, CH4
of facility-specific DREs that have been emissions, the initial and any emissions from wastewater treatment at
measured using a standard protocol. Gas subsequent tests of the DRE of oxidizers, ethanol production facilities were
consumption is collected as business as the initial and any subsequent tests to 68,200 metric tons CO2e. Proposed
usual and is not expected to be missing; determine emission factors for process, requirements for GHG emissions form
therefore, it would not be permitted to and abatement device calibration/ wastewater treatment are set forth in
revert to the Tier 1 approach for maintenance records. Section V.II of this preamble. For more
estimating emissions. When estimating These records consist of values that information on wastewater treatment at
heat transfer fluid emissions during are directly used to calculate the
ethanol production facilities, please
semiconductor manufacture, the use of emissions that are reported and are
refer to the Ethanol Production TSD
the mass-balance approach requires necessary to enable verification that the
(EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–010).
correct records for all inputs. Should the GHG emissions monitoring and
calculations are done correctly. As noted in Section IV.B of this
facility be missing records for a given
preamble under the heading ‘‘Reporting
input, it may be possible that the heat J. Ethanol Production by fuel and industrial gas suppliers’’,
transfer fluid supplier has information
1. Definition of the Source Category ethanol producers and other suppliers
in their records for the facility.
of biomass-based fuel are not required to
Ethanol is produced primarily for use
5. Selection of Data Reporting report GHG emissions from their
as a fuel component, but is also used in
Requirements products under this proposal, and we
industrial applications and in the
Owners and operators would be manufacture of beverage alcohol. seek comment on this approach.
required to report GHG emissions for Ethanol can be produced from the 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
the facility, for all plasma etching fermentation of sugar, starch, grain, and
processes, all chamber cleaning, all cellulosic biomass feedstocks, or The proposed threshold for reporting
chemical vapor deposition processes, produced synthetically from ethylene or emissions from ethanol production
and all heat tranfer fluid use. Along hydrogen and carbon monoxide. facilities is 25,000 metric tons CO2e
with their emissions, facilities would be The sources of GHG emissions at total emissions from stationary fuel
required to report the following: Method ethanol production facilities that must combustion, landfills, and onsite
used (i.e., 2b or 3), mass of each gas fed be reported under the proposed rule are wastewater treatment. Table J–1 of this
into each process type, production stationary fuel combustion, onsite preamble illustrates the emissions and
capacity in terms of substrate surface landfills, and onsite wastewater facilities that would be covered under
area (e.g., silicon, PV-cell, LCD), factors treatment. various thresholds.
TABLE J–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR ETHANOL PRODUCTION

National emissions Total number
Threshold level mtCO2e of facilities mtCO2e/year Percent Number Percent
1,000 mtCO2e ..................... Not estimated ............. 140 Not estimated ............. Not estimated ............. >101 >72
10,000 mtCO2e ................... Not estimated ............. 140 Not estimated ............. Not estimated ............. >94 >67
25,000 mtCO2e ................... Not estimated ............. 140 Not estimated ............. Not estimated ............. >86 >61
100,000 mtCO2e ................. Not estimated ............. 140 Not estimated ............. Not estimated ............. >43 >31
Data were unavailable to estimate wastewater treatment and stationary used to estimate the minimum number
emissions from landfills at ethanol fuel combustion emissions at facilities. of facilities that would meet each of the
refineries, or to estimate the combined Data on stationary fuel combustion were facility-level thresholds examined. The
25,000 metric tons CO2e threshold 6. Selection of Records That Must Be Ferroalloy production results in both
results in a reasonable number of Maintained combustion and process-related GHG
reporters, and is consistent with Refer to Sections V.C, V.HH, and emissions. The major source of GHG
thresholds for other source categories. V.GG of this preamble for recordkeeping emissions from a ferroalloy production
For more information on this analysis, requirements for stationary fuel facility are the process-related emissions
please refer to the Ethanol Production combustion, landfills, and industrial from the electric arc furnace operations.
TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–010). wastewater treatment occurring on-site These emissions, which consist
EPA is seeking comment on the analysis at ethanol production facilities. primarily of CO2e with smaller amounts
of CH4, result from the reduction of the
and on alternative data sources for
K. Ferroalloy Production metallic oxides and the consumption of
stationary combustion at ethanol
1. Definition of the Source Category the graphite (carbon) electrodes during
production facilities. For specific
the batch process.
information on costs, including A ferroalloy is an alloy of iron with Total nationwide GHG emissions from
unamortized first year capital at least one other metal such as ferroalloy production facilities operating
expenditures, please refer to section 4 of chromium, silicon, molybdenum, in the U.S. were estimated to be
the RIA and the RIA cost appendix. manganese, or titanium. For this approximately 2.3 million metric tons
3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring proposed rule, we are defining the CO2e for the year 2006. Process-related
Methods ferroalloy production source category to GHG emissions were 2.0 million metric
consist of any facility that uses tons CO2e (86 percent of the total
Refer to Sections V.C, V.HH, and V.II pyrometallurgical techniques to produce emissions). The remaining 0.3 million
of this preamble for monitoring methods any of the following metals: metric tons CO2e (14 percent of the total
for general stationary fuel combustion ferrochromium, ferromanganese, emissions) were combustion GHG
sources, landfills, and wastewater ferromolybdenum, ferronickel, emissions.
treatment occurring on-site at ethanol ferrosilicon, ferrotitanium, Additional background information
production facilities. ferrotungsten, ferrovanadium, about GHG emissions from the
silicomanganese, or silicon metal. ferroalloy production source category is
4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating Ferroalloys are used extensively in the available in the Ferroalloy Production
Missing Data iron and steel industry to impart TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–011).
Refer to Sections V.C, V.HH, and V.II distinctive qualities to stainless and
other specialty steels, and serve 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
of this preamble for procedures for
important functions during iron and Ferroalloy production facilities in the
estimating missing data for general
steel production cycles. Silicon metal is U.S. vary in the specific types of alloy
stationary fuel combustion sources,
included in the ferroalloy metals products produced. In developing the
landfills, and industrial wastewater
category due to the similarities between threshold for ferroalloy production
treatment occurring on-site at ethanol
its production process and that of facilities, we considered using annual
production facilities. ferrosilicon. Silicon metal is used in GHG emissions-based threshold levels
5. Selection of Data Reporting alloys of aluminum and in the chemical of 1,000 metric tons CO2e, 10,000 metric
Requirements industry as a raw material in silicon- tons CO2e, 25,000 metric tons CO2e and
based chemical manufacturing. 100,000 metric tons CO2e. Table K–1 of
Refer to Sections V.C, V.HH, and V.II The basic process used at U.S. this preamble presents the estimated
of this preamble for reporting ferroalloy production facilities is a batch emissions and number of facilities that
requirements for general stationary fuel process in which a measured mixture of would be subject to GHG emissions
combustion sources, landfills, and metals, carbonaceous reducing agents, reporting, based upon emission
industrial wastewater treatment and slag forming materials are melted estimates using production capacity
occurring on-site at ethanol production and reduced in an electric arc furnace. data for the nine U.S. facilities that
facilities. In addition, you would be The carbonaceous reducing agents produce either ferrosilicon, silicon
required to report the quantity of CO2e typically used are coke or coal. Molten metal, ferrochromium, ferromanganese,
captured for use (if applicable) and the alloy tapped from the electric arc or silicomanganese alloys. We were
end use, if known. For more information furnace is casted into solid alloy slabs unable to obtain production data for an
on reporting requirements for CO2e which are further mechanically estimated five additional facilities that
capture, please refer to Section V.PP of processed for sale as product or produce ferromolybdenum and
this preamble. disposed in landfills. ferrotitanium alloys.
TABLE K–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR FERROALLOY PRODUCTION FACILITIES

Threshold level (metric tons CO2e/yr) (metric tons of facilities Metric tons Percent Number Percent
CO2e/yr) CO2e/yr
1,000 ............................................................ 2,343,990 9 2,343,990 100 9 100

10,000 .......................................................... 2,343,990 9 2,343,990 100 9 100
25,000 .......................................................... 2,343,990 9 2,343,990 100 9 100
100,000 ........................................................ 2,343,990 9 2,276,639 97 8 89
Table K–1 of this preamble shows that thresholds except 100,000 metric tons could be simplified for these facilities
all nine of the facilities would be CO2e, when considering combustion by making the rule applicable to all
required to report emissions at all and process-related emissions. The rule ferroalloy production facilities.
However, because the threshold analysis material or from information provided the CEMS capture all combustion- and
did not include all of the facilities in the by the material suppliers. In addition, process-related CO2 emissions you
ferroalloy source category that the quantities of these materials would be required to follow the
potentially could be subject to the rule, consumed and produced during requirements of proposed 40 CFR part
we have decided that it is appropriate production would be measured and 98, subpart C, to estimate CO2 emissions
to include a reporting threshold level. recorded. To obtain the CO2 emissions from the industrial source. Also, refer to
The proposed threshold selected for estimate, the average carbon content of proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C to
reporting emissions from ferroalloy each input and output material is estimate combustion-related CH4 and
production facilities is 25,000 metric multiplied by the corresponding mass N2O.
tons CO2e per year consistent with the consumed and a conversion of carbon to For facilities that do not currently
threshold level being proposed for other CO2. The difference between the have CEMS that meet the requirements
source categories. This threshold level calculated total carbon input and the outlined in proposed 40 CFR part 98,
would avoid placing a reporting burden total carbon output is the estimated CO2 subpart C, or where CEMS would not
on any small specialty ferroalloy emissions to the atmosphere. This adequately account for process
production facility which may operate method assumes that all of the carbon emissions, the proposed monitoring
as a small business while still requiring is converted during the process. For method is Option 2. You would be
the reporting of GHG emissions from the estimating the CH4 emissions from the required to follow the requirements of
ferroalloy production facilities releasing electric arc furnace, selection of this proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C to
most of the GHG emissions in the source option for estimating CO2 emissions estimate emissions of CO2, CH4 and N2O
category. A full discussion of the would still require using the Option 1 from stationary combustion. This
threshold selection analysis is available approach of applying default emission section of the preamble provides
in the Ferroalloy Production TSD (EPA– factors to estimate CH4 emissions. procedures only for calculating and
HQ–OAR–2008–0508–011). For specific Option 3. Use CO2 emissions data reporting process-related emissions.
information on costs, including from a stack test performed using U.S. Given the variability of the alloy
unamortized first year capital EPA test methods to develop a site- products produced and carbonaceous
expenditures, please refer to section 4 of specific process emissions factor which reducing agents used at U.S. ferroalloy
the RIA and the RIA cost appendix. is then applied to quantity measurement production facilities, we concluded that
data of feed material or product for the using facility-specific information under
3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring specified reporting period. This Option 2 is preferred for estimating CO2
Methods monitoring method is applicable to emissions from electric arc furnaces.
We reviewed existing methodologies electric arc furnace configurations for This method is consistent with IPCC
used by the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for which the GHG emissions are contained Tier 3 methods and the preferred
National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, within a stack or vent. Using site- approaches for estimating emissions in
Canadian Mandatory Greenhouse Gas specific emissions factors based on the Canadian and Australian mandatory
Reporting Program, the Australian short-term stack testing is appropriate reporting programs. We consider the
National Greenhouse Gas Reporting for those facilities where process inputs additional burden of the material
Program, and EU Emissions Trading (e.g., feed materials, carbonaceous measurements required for the carbon
System. In general, the methodologies reducing agents) and process operating balance small in relation to the
used for estimating process related GHG parameters remain relatively consistent increased accuracy expected from using
emissions at the facility level coalesce over time. this site-specific information to
around the following four options. Option 4. Use direct emission testing calculate CO2 emissions.
Option 1. Apply a default emission of CO2 emissions. For electric arc Emissions data collected under
factor to ferroalloy production. This is a furnace configurations in which the Option 3 would have the lowest
simplified emission calculation method process off-gases are contained within a uncertainty, expected to be less than 5
using only default emission factors to stack or vent, direct measurement of the percent. For Option 2, the material-
estimate process-related CO2 and CH4 CO2 emissions can be made by specific emission factors would be
emissions. The method requires continuously measuring the off-gas expected to be within 10 percent, which
multiplying the amount of each stream CO2 concentration and flow rate would provide less uncertainty overall
ferroalloy product type produced by the using a CEMS. Using a CEMS, the total than for Option 1, which may have
appropriate default emission factors CO2 emissions tabulated from the uncertainty of 25 to 50 percent. The use
from the 2006 IPCC Guidelines. recorded emissions measurement data of the default CO2 emission factors
Option 2. Perform a monthly carbon would be reported annually. If a under Option 1 would be more
balance using measurements of the ferroalloy production facility uses an appropriate for GHG estimates from
carbon content of specific process open or semi-open electric arc furnace aggregated process information on a
inputs and process outputs and the for which the CO2 emissions are not sector-wide or nationwide basis than for
amounts of these materials consumed or fully captured and contained within a determining GHG emissions from
produced during a specified reporting stack or vent (i.e., a significant portion specific facilities.
period. This option is applicable to of the CO2 emissions escape capture by In comparison to the CO2 emissions
estimating only CO2 emissions from an the hood and are release directly to the levels from an electric arc furnace, the
electric arc furnace, and is the IPCC Tier atmosphere), then another GHG CH4 emissions compose a small fraction
3 approach and the higher order emission estimation method other than of the total GHG emissions from electric
methods in the Canadian and Australian direct measurement would be more arc furnace operations at a ferroalloy
reporting programs. Implementation of appropriate. production facility. The proposed
this method requires you to determine Proposed Option. Under the proposed Option 2 above doesn’t account for CH4.
the carbon contents of carbonaceous rule, if you are required to use an Considering the amount that CH4
material inputs to and outputs from the existing CEMS to meet the requirements emissions contribute to the total GHG
electric arc furnaces. Facilities outlined in proposed 40 CFR part 98, emissions and the absence of facility-
determine carbon contents through subpart C, you would be required to use specific methods in other reporting
analysis of representative samples of the CEMS to estimate CO2 emissions. Where systems, we are proposing that facilities
use Option 1 and the IPCC default includes the total number of electric arc byproducts and products, during
emission factors to estimate CH4 furnaces operated at the facility, the occasional service work on the
emissions from electric arc furnaces at facility ferroalloy product production production equipment, and during the
ferroalloy production facilities. This capacity, the annual facility production filling of tanks or other containers that
method provides reasonable estimates of quantity for each ferroalloy product, the are distributed by the producer (e.g., on
the magnitude of the CH4 emissions number of facility operating hours in trucks and railcars). Fluorinated GHG
from the units without the need for calendar year, and quantities of carbon emissions from U.S. facilities producing
owners or operator to conduct on-site inputs and outputs if applicable. A fluorinated GHGs are estimated to range
CH4 emissions measurements. complete list of data to be reported is from 0.8 percent to 2 percent of the
We also decided against Option 3 included in the proposed 40 CFR part amount of fluorinated GHGs produced,
because of the potential for significant 98, subparts A and K. depending on the facility.
variations at ferroalloy production In 2006, 12 U.S. facilities produced
facilities in the characteristics and 6. Selection of Records That Must Be
Retained over 350 million metric tons CO2e of
quantities of the electric arc furnace HFCs, PFCs, SF6, and NF3. These
inputs (e.g., metal ores, carbonaceous Maintaining records of the facilities are estimated to have emitted
reducing agents) and process operating information used to determine the approximately 5.3 million metric tons
parameters. A method using periodic, reported GHG emissions are necessary CO2e of HFCs, PFCs, SF6, and NF3,
short-term stack testing would not be to enable us to verify that the GHG based on an emission rate of 1.5 percent.
practical or appropriate for those emissions monitoring and calculations We estimate that an additional 6
ferroalloy production facilities where were done correctly. We propose that all facilities produced approximately 1
the electric arc furnace inputs and affected facilities maintain records of
million metric tons CO2e of fluorinated
operating parameters do not remain product production quantities, and
anesthetics. At an emission rate of 1.5
relatively consistent over the reporting number of facility operating hours each
percent, these facilities would emit
period. month. If you use the carbon balance
approximately 15,000 metric tons CO2e
The various approaches to monitoring procedure, you would record for each
of these anesthetics.
GHG emissions are elaborated in the carbon-containing input material
Ferroalloy Production TSD (EPA–HQ– consumed or used and output material The production of fluorinated gases
OAR–2008–0508–011). produced the monthly material causes both combustion and fluorinated
quantity, monthly average carbon GHG emissions. Fluorinated GHG
4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating production facilities would be required
content determined for material, and
Missing Data records of the supplier provided to follow the requirements of proposed
In cases when an owner or operator information or analyses used for the 40 CFR part 98, subpart C to estimate
calculates CO2 and CH4 emissions using determination. If you use the CEMS emissions of CO2, CH4 and N2O from
a carbon balance or an emission factor, procedure, you would maintain the stationary fuel combustion. In addition,
the proposed rule would require the use CEMS measurement records. these facilities would be required to
of substitute data whenever a quality- report their production of industrial
assured value of a parameter that is used L. Fluorinated GHG Production GHGs under proposed 40 CFR part 98,
to calculate GHG emissions is 1. Definition of the Source Category subpart OO. This section of the
unavailable, or ‘‘missing.’’ If the carbon preamble discusses only the procedures
This source category covers emissions for calculating and reporting emissions
content analysis of carbon inputs or of fluorinated GHGs that occur during
outputs is missing or lost, the substitute of fluorinated GHGs.
the production of HFCs, PFCs, SF6, NF3,
data value would be the average of the and other fluorinated GHGs such as 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
quality-assured values of the parameter fluorinated ethers. Specifically, it covers
immediately before and immediately We propose that owners and operators
emissions that are never counted as of facilities estimate and report
after the missing data period. The ‘‘mass produced’’ under the proposed
likelihood for missing process input and fluorinated GHG and combustion
requirements for suppliers of industrial emissions if those emissions together
output data is low, as businesses closely GHGs discussed in Section OO of this
track their purchase of production exceed 25,000 metric tons CO2e.
preamble. These emissions include
inputs. In those cases when an owner or In developing the threshold, we
fluorinated GHG products that are
operator uses direct measurement by a considered emissions thresholds of
emitted upstream of the production
CO2 CEMS, the missing data procedures 1,000 metric tons CO2e, 10,000 metric
measurement and fluorinated GHG
would be the same as the Tier 4 tons CO2e, 25,000 metric tons CO2e and
byproducts that are generated and
requirements described for general 100,000 metric tons CO2e and their
emitted either without or despite
stationary combustion sources in capacity equivalents. Facility-specific
recapture or destruction.71 These
Section V.C of this preamble. emissions were estimated by
emissions exclude generation and
multiplying an emission factor of 1.5
5. Selection of Data Reporting emissions of HFC–23 during the
percent by the estimated production at
Requirements production of HCFC–22, which are
each facility. The capacity thresholds
discussed in Section O of this preamble.
The proposed rule would require were developed based on emissions of
Emissions can occur from leaks at
reporting of the total annual CO2 and fluorinated GHGs, assuming full
flanges and connections in the
CH4 emissions for each electric arc production line, during separation of
capacity utilization and an emission rate
furnace at a ferroalloy production of 2 percent of production. Because EPA
facility, as well as any stationary fuel 71 Byproducts that are emitted or destroyed at the had little information on combustion-
combustion emissions. In addition we production facility are excluded from the proposed related emissions at fluorinated GHG
propose that additional information definition of ‘‘produce a fluorinated GHG.’’ Any production facilities, these emissions
which forms the basis of the emissions HFC–23 generated during the production of HCFC– were not incorporated into the capacity
22 is also excluded from this definition, even if the
estimates also be reported so that we HFC–23 is recaptured. However, other fluorinated
thresholds or the threshold analysis.
can understand and verify the reported GHG byproducts that are recaptured for any reason Table L–1 of this preamble illustrates
emissions. This additional information would be considered to be ‘‘produced.’’ the HFC, PFC, SF6, and NF3 emissions
and facilities that would be covered

under these various thresholds.
TABLE L–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR FLUORINATED GHG EMISSIONS FROM PRODUCTION OF HFCS, PFCS, SF6, AND
NF3
national Number of
Threshold level (metric tons CO2e/r) emissions facilities Metric tons
(metric tons CO2e
Percent Number Percent
CO2e)
Emission-Based Thresholds
1,000 ........................................................ 5,300,000 12 5,300,000 100 12 100

10,000 ...................................................... 5,300,000 12 5,300,000 100 12 100
25,000 ...................................................... 5,300,000 12 5,300,000 100 12 100
100,000 .................................................... 5,300,000 12 5,100,000 97 9 75
Production Capacity-Based Thresholds
50,000 ...................................................... 5,300,000 12 5,300,000 100 12 100

500,000 .................................................... 5,300,000 12 5,300,000 100 12 100
1,250,000 ................................................. 5,300,000 12 5,300,000 100 12 100
5,000,000 ................................................. 5,300,000 12 5,200,000 98 10 83
As can be seen from the tables, most GWP of the fluorinated GHG produced If you produce fluorinated GHGs, we
HFC, PFC, SF6, and NF3 production on that line. Facilities would then be are proposing that you monitor
facilities would be covered by all required to sum the resulting CO2e fluorinated GHG emissions using the
emission- and capacity-based capacities across all lines. Where more second approach, known as the mass-
thresholds. Although we do not have than one fluorinated GHG could be balance or yield approach. There are
facility-specific production information produced by a production line, yielding two variants of the mass-balance
for producers of fluorinated anesthetics, more than one possible production approach. In the first variant, only some
we believe that few or none of these capacity for that line in CO2e terms, of the reactants and products, including
facilities are likely to have emissions facilities would be required to use the the fluorinated GHG product, are
above the proposed threshold. highest possible production capacity (in considered. In the second variant, all of
EPA requests comment on whether it CO2e terms) in their threshold the reactants, products, and by-products
should adopt a capacity-based threshold calculations. are considered. Both variants are
for this sector, and if so, what discussed in more detail in the
A full discussion of the threshold
fluorinated GHG and combustion- Fluorinated GHG Production TSD
selection analysis is available in the
related emission rates should be used to (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–012).
Fluorinated GHG Production TSD
develop this threshold. Where EPA has We are proposing that you monitor
reasonably good information on the (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–012). For emissions using the first variant. In this
relationship between production specific information on costs, including approach, you would calculate the
capacity and emissions, and where this unamortized first year capital difference between the expected
relationship does not vary excessively expenditures, please refer to section 4 of production of each fluorinated GHG
from facility to facility, EPA is generally the RIA and the RIA cost appendix. based on the consumption of reactants
proposing capacity-based thresholds to 3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring and the measured production of that
make it easy for facilities to determine Methods fluorinated GHG, accounting for yield
whether or not they must report. In this losses related to byproducts (including
case, however, EPA has little data on In developing this proposed rule, we intermediates permanently removed
combustion emissions and their likely reviewed a number of protocols for from the process) and wastes. Yield
magnitude compared to fluorinated estimating fluorinated GHG emissions losses that could not be accounted for
GHG emissions from this source. from fluorocarbon production, such as would be attributed to emissions of the
As noted above, the capacity the 2006 IPCC Guidelines. In general, fluorinated GHG product. This
thresholds in Table L–1 of this preamble these protocols present three methods. calculation would be performed for each
were developed based on a fluorinated In the first approach, a default emission reactant, and estimated emissions of the
GHG emission rate of 2 percent of factor is applied to the total production fluorinated GHG product would be
production. While EPA believes that of the plant. In the second approach, equated to the average of the results
this emission rate is an upper-bound for fluorinated GHG emissions are equated obtained for each reactant. If fluorinated
fluorinated GHGs, neither the rate nor to the difference between the mass of GHG byproducts were produced and
the thresholds account for combustion- reactants fed into the process and the were not completely recaptured or
related emissions. Thus, it is possible sum of the masses of the main product completely destroyed, you would also
that the production capacities listed in and those of any by-products and/or estimate emissions of each fluorinated
Table L–1 of this preamble are wastes. In the third approach, the GHG byproduct.
inappropriately high. composition and mass flow rate of the To carry out this approach, you would
In the event that a capacity-based gas streams actually vented to the daily weigh or meter each reactant fed
threshold were adopted, facilities would atmosphere are monitored either into the process, the primary fluorinated
be required to multiply the production continuously or during a period long GHG produced by the process, any
capacity of each production line by the enough to establish an emission factor. reactants permanently removed from the
process (i.e., sent to the thermal oxidizer be untracked emissions or other losses accuracy, precision, and cost of the
or other equipment, not immediately of reactants or fluorinated by-products. proposed approach as a whole.
recycled back into the process), any In general, EPA understands that Analysis of Alternative Methods. EPA
byproducts generated, and any streams reactant flows are measured at the inlet is not proposing the approach using the
that contain the product or byproducts to the reactor; thus, any losses of default emission factor. While this
and that are recaptured or destroyed. reactant that occur between the point of approach is simple, it is also highly
For these measurements you would be measurement and the reactor are likely
imprecise; emissions in U.S. plants are
required to use scales and/or flowmeters to be small. However, reactants that are
estimated to vary from 0.8 percent to 2
with an accuracy and precision of 0.2 recovered from the process, whether
percent of production, more than a
percent of full scale. If monitored they are recycled back into it or
process streams included more than one removed permanently, may experience factor of two.73 Thus, applying a default
component (product, byproducts, or some losses that the proposed method factor (1.5 percent, for example) is likely
other materials) in more than trace does not account for. EPA requests to significantly overestimate emissions
concentrations,72 you would be required comment on the extent to which such at some plants while significantly
to monitor concentrations of products losses occur, and how these might be underestimating them at others.
and byproducts in these streams at least measured. EPA is not proposing the second
daily using equipment and methods Fluorocarbon by-products, according variant of the mass-balance approach.
(e.g., gas chromatography) with an to the IPCC Guidelines, generally have This variant is implemented by
accuracy and precision of 5 percent or ‘‘radiative forcing properties similar to comparing the total mass of reactants to
better at the concentrations of the those of the desired fluorochemical.’’ If the total mass of monitored products
process samples. Finally, you would be this is always the case (with the and byproducts, without regard for
required to perform daily mass balance exception of HFC–23 generated during chemical identity. The drawbacks of
calculations for each product produced. production of HCFC–22, which is this variant are that it is not the method
In general, we understand that addressed in Section V.O of this currently used by facilities to track their
production facilities already perform preamble), then assuming by-product production, and it would count losses of
these measurements and calculations to emissions are product emissions would non-GHG products (e.g., HCl) as GHG
the proposed level of accuracy and not lead to large errors in estimating emissions. EPA requests comment on
precision in order to monitor their overall fluorinated GHG emissions. If this understanding and on the potential
processes and yields. However, we the GWPs of emitted fluorinated by- usefulness and accuracy of the second
request comment on this issue. We products are sometimes significantly variant of the mass-balance approach for
specifically request comment on the different from those of the fluorinated estimating fluorinated GHG emissions.
proposed scope and frequency of GHG product, and if the quantity of by-
process stream concentration product emitted can be estimated (e.g., EPA is not proposing the third
measurements. As noted above, based on periodic or past sampling of approach because it is our
concentration measurements would be process streams), then the quantity of understanding that facilities do not
triggered when products or byproducts emitted product could be adjusted to routinely monitor their process vents,
occur in more than trace concentrations reflect this. EPA requests comment on and therefore such monitoring is likely
with other components in process whether it is necessary or practical to to be more expensive than the proposed
streams (which include waste streams). distinguish between emissions of mass-balance approach. However, the
However, it is possible that products or fluorinated GHG products and cost of monitoring may not be
byproducts could occur in more than emissions of fluorinated by-products, prohibitive, particularly if it is
trace concentrations but still result in and if so, on the best approach for doing performed for a relatively short period
negligible yield losses (e.g., less than 0.2 so. of time for the purpose of developing an
percent). In this case, ignoring these We also request comment on the emission factor, similar to the approach
losses may not significantly affect the proposed accuracy and precision for estimating smelter-specific slope
accuracy of the overall GHG emission requirements for flowmeters and scales. coefficients for aluminum production.74
estimate. (This issue is discussed in If a waste or by-product stream is Moreover, if the vent monitoring
more detail in the Fluorinated GHG significantly smaller than the reactant approach reduces the uncertainty of the
Production TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– and product streams, a less precise emissions measurement by even 10
0508–012).) Similarly, decreasing the measurement of this stream (e.g., 0.5 percent relative to the mass-balance
frequency of stream sampling may not percent) may not have a large impact on approach, this would reduce the
have a significant impact on accuracy or the precision of the fluorinated GHG absolute uncertainty at the typical
precision if previous monitoring has emission estimate and may therefore be production facility by 40,000 metric
shown that the concentrations of acceptable. Similarly, if a measurement tons CO2e. (The extent to which
products and byproducts in process is repeated multiple times over the uncertainty would be reduced would
streams are stable or vary in a course of the reporting period, the depend in part on the sensitivity and
predictable and quantifiable way (e.g., precision of individual measurements
seasonally due to differences in could be relaxed without seriously 73 Fluorinated GHG Production TSD (EPA–HQ–
compromising the precision of the OAR–2008–0508–012).
condenser cooling water temperature).
EPA recognizes that the proposed monthly or annual estimates. One way 74 Conversations with representatives of
mass-balance approach would assume of adding flexibility to the precision fluorocarbon producers indicate that robust
requirements would be to require that emission factors could often be developed by
that all yield losses that are not monitoring emissions (and a related parameter,
accounted for are attributable to the error of the fluorinated GHG such as production) for one month under
emissions of the fluorinated GHG emissions estimate be no greater than representative operating conditions. Where
product. In some cases, the losses may some fraction of the yield, e.g., 0.3 emissions vary seasonally (e.g., due to changes in
percent, on a monthly basis. Facilities condenser cooling water temperature), two separate
monitoring periods of one month each would often
72 EPA is proposing to define ‘‘trace could achieve this level of precision suffice. However, the length and frequency of
concentration’’ as any concentration less than 0.1 however they chose. We request monitoring would depend on the variability of the
percent by mass of the process stream. comment on this issue and on the process.
precision of the vent concentration fluorinated GHG emissions associated use as feedstocks is permitted to
measurements.) with the evacuation of cylinders or continue indefinitely.
For completeness, monitoring of other containers that are returned to the
process vents would need to be 4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating
facility containing either residual GHGs
supplemented by monitoring of Missing Data
(heels) or GHGs that would be reclaimed
equipment leaks, whose emissions or destroyed. We are not proposing to In the event that a scale or flowmeter
would not occur through process vents. require reporting of these emissions normally used to measure reactants,
To capture emissions from equipment because they are not associated with products, by-products, or wastes fails to
leaks, we could require use of EPA new production; instead, they are meet an accuracy or precision test,
Method 21 and the Protocol for downstream emissions associated with malfunctions, or is rendered inoperable,
Equipment Leak Estimates (EPA–453/R– earlier production.76 Requiring we are proposing that facilities be
95–017). The Protocol includes four reporting of these emissions could required to estimate these quantities
methods for estimating equipment leaks. therefore lead to double-counting.77 using other measurements where these
These are, from least to most accurate, data are available. For example,
Nevertheless, according to the 2006
the Average Emission Factor Approach, facilities that ordinarily measure
IPCC Guidelines, the overall emission
the Screening Ranges Approach, EPA production by metering the flow into
rate of a production facility can increase
Correlation Approach, and the Unit- the day tank could use the weight of
by nearly an order of magnitude (up to
Specific Correlation Approach. Most product charged into shipping
8 percent) if the residual GHG
recent EPA leak detection and repair containers for sale and distribution as a
remaining in the cylinders is vented to
regulations require use of one of the substitute. It is our understanding that
the atmosphere. One method of tracking
Correlation Approaches in the Protocol. the types of flowmeters and scales used
such emissions would be to subtract the
To use any approach other than the to measure fluorocarbon production
quantities of GHG reclaimed (purified)
Average Emission Factor Approach, you (e.g., Coriolis meters) are generally quite
and sold or otherwise sent back to users
would need to have (or develop) reliable, and therefore that it should
from the quantities of residual and used
Response Factors relating rarely be necessary to rely solely on
GHGs returned to the facility in
concentrations of the target fluorinated secondary production measurements. In
cylinders by users. This approach
GHG to concentrations of the gas with general, production facilities rely on
would be similar to the mass-balance
which the leak detector was calibrated. accurate monitoring and reporting of the
approach proposed for estimating SF6
We understand that at least two inputs and outputs of the production
fluorocarbon producers currently use emissions from users and manufacturers
process.
methods in the Protocol to quantify their of electrical equipment. If concentration measurements are
emissions of fluorinated GHGs with Emissions of Fluorinated GHGs unavailable for some period, we are
different levels of accuracy and Associated with Production of ODS. We proposing that the facility use the
precision.75 request comment on whether you average of the concentration
We request comment on the should be required to report emissions measurements from just before and just
accuracies and costs of the approaches of fluorinated GHGs associated with after the period of missing data.
in the Protocol as they would be applied production of ODS (other than There is one proposed exception to
to fluorinated GHG production. We also emissions of HFC–23 associated with these requirements: If either method
request comment on the significance of production of HCFC–22, which are would result in a significant under- or
equipment leaks compared to process discussed in Section O of this overestimate of the missing parameter,
vents as a source of fluorinated GHG preamble). These emissions would be then the facility would be required to
emissions. by-product emissions, for example of develop an alternative estimate of the
In addition, we request comment on HFCs, since the definition of fluorinated parameter and explain why and how it
whether we should require the vent GHGs excludes ODS. We specifically developed that estimate.
monitoring approach, what sensitivity request comment on the likely We request comment on these
and precision would be appropriate for magnitude of these emissions, both in proposed methods for estimating
the vent concentration measurements, absolute terms and relative to missing data.
and on the increase in cost and fluorinated GHG emissions from
improvements in accuracy and fluorinated GHG production. We believe 5. Selection of Data Reporting
precision that would be associated with that these emissions may occur due to Requirements
this approach relative to the proposed the chemical similarities between HFCs, Under the proposed rule, owners and
approach. HCFCs, and CFCs and the common use operators of facilities producing
Emissions from Evacuation of of halogen replacement chemistry to fluorinated GHGs would be required to
Returned Containers. We request produce them. Although production of report both their fluorinated GHG
comment on whether you should be HCFCs and CFCs is limited under the emissions and the quantities used to
required to measure and report regulations implementing Title VI of the estimate them, including the masses of
CAA, production of these substances for the reactants, products, by-products,
75 One producer estimates HFC and other
and wastes, and, if applicable, the
fluorocarbon emissions by using the Average
Emission Factor Approach. This approach simply
76 Emissions from the filling or refilling of quantities of any product in the by-
assigns an average emission factor to each containers with new product may or may not be products and/or wastes (if that product
component without any evaluation of whether or covered by proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart L, is emitted at the facility). We are
how much that component is actually leaking. The depending on where production is measured. If
production is measured upstream of filling, then the
proposing that owners and operators
second producer estimates emissions using the
Screening Ranges Approach, which assigns emissions would not be covered by proposed 40 report annual totals of these quantities.
different emission factors to components based on CFR part 98, subpart L. If production is measured Where fluorinated GHG production
whether the concentrations of the target chemical downstream of filling, then the emissions would be facilities have estimated missing data,
are above or below 10,000 ppmv. This producer has covered by subpart L. you would be required to report the
developed a Response Factor for HCFC–22, which 77 However, this double-counting could be
is present in the same streams as the HFC–23 whose avoided if the emissions from returned cylinders
reason the data were missing, the length
leaks are being estimated. (HFC–23 emissions are were clearly distinguished from other production of time the data were missing, the
discussed in Section O of this preamble.) facility emissions in the emissions report. method used to estimate the missing
data, and the estimates of those data. M. Food Processing Food Processing TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–
Where the missing data was estimated 2008–0508–013).
by a method other than one of those Landfill GHG emissions are described
specified, the owner or operator would Food processing facilities prepare raw and considered in Section V.HH of this
be required to report why the specified ingredients for consumption by animals preamble. For more information on
method would lead to a significant or humans. Many facilities in the meat landfills at food processing facilities,
under- or overestimate of the and poultry, and fruit, vegetable, and please refer to the Landfills TSD (EPA–
parameter(s) and the rationale for the juice processing industries have on-site HQ–OAR–2008–0508–034).
methods used to estimate the missing wastewater treatment. This can include The sources of GHG emissions at food
data. the use of anaerobic and aerobic processing facilities that must be
We propose that facilities report these lagoons, screening, fat traps and reported under the proposed rule are
data because the data are necessary to dissolved air flotation. These facilities stationary fuel combustion, onsite
can also include onsite landfills for landfills and onsite wastewater
verify facilities’ calculations of
waste disposal. In 2006, CH4 emissions treatment.
fluorinated GHG emissions. We request
comment on these proposed reporting from wastewater treatment at food 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
requirements. processing facilities were 3.7 million
metric tons CO2e, and CH4 emissions We considered using annual GHG
6. Selection of Records That Must Be from onsite landfills were 7.2 million emissions-based threshold levels of
Retained metric tons CO2e. Data are not available 1,000 metric tons CO2e, 10,000 metric
to estimate stationary fuel combustion- tons CO2e, 25,000 metric tons CO2e and
Under the proposed rule, owners and 100,000 metric tons CO2e for food
related GHG emissions at food
operators of facilities producing processing facilities. The proposed
processing facilities.
fluorinated GHGs would be required to threshold for reporting emissions from
retain records documenting the data Proposed requirements for stationary food processing facilities is 25,000
reported, including records of daily and fuel combustion emissions are set forth metric tons CO2e total emissions from
monthly mass-balance calculations and in proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C. combined stationary fuel combustion,
calibration records for flowmeters, Wastewater GHG emissions are on-site landfills, and on-site wastewater
scales, and gas chromatographs. These described and considered in Section V.II treatment. Table M–1 of this preamble
records are necessary to verify that the of this preamble. For more information illustrates the emissions and facilities
GHG emissions monitoring and on wastewater treatment at food that would be covered under these
calculations were performed correctly. processing facilities, please refer to the various thresholds.
TABLE M–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR FOOD PROCESSING FACILITIES

Threshold National Total Metric tons Percent Number Percent
CO2e/year
1,000 mtCO2e .......................................... NE 5,719 NE NE 802 14.0

10,000 mtCO2e ........................................ NE 5,719 NE NE 170 3.0
25,000 mtCO2e ........................................ NE 5,719 NE NE 100 1.7
100,000 mtCO2e ...................................... NE 5,719 NE NE 10 0.2
NE = Not Estimated.
Data were unavailable at the time of 3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring requirements for general stationary fuel
this analysis to estimate stationary Methods combustion, landfills, and wastewater
combustion emissions onsite, or the co- treatment, respectively, occurring on-
Refer to Sections V.C, V.HH, and V.II
location of landfills and wastewater site at food processing facilities. In
of this preamble for monitoring methods
treatment at food processing faculties. addition, you would be required to
for general stationary fuel combustion
Facility coverage based on onsite report the quantity of CO2 captured for
sources, landfills, and wastewater
wastewater GHG emissions and landfill use (if applicable) and the end use, if
treatment, respectively, occurring on-
GHG emissions was estimated as known.
site at food production facilities.
described in the Wastewater Treatment 6. Selection of Records That Must Be
TSD and Landfills TSD (EPA–HQ– 4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating
Maintained
OAR–2008–0508–035) and (EPA–HQ– Missing Data
OAR–2008–0508–034). We estimate that Refer to Sections V.C, V.HH, and V.II
Refer to Sections V.C, V.HH, and V.II
at the 25,000 metric tons CO2e of this preamble for recordkeeping
of this preamble for procedures for
threshold, a small percentage of requirements for general stationary fuel
estimating missing data for general
facilities are covered by this rule, combustion sources, landfills, and
stationary fuel combustion sources,
resulting in potentially a large wastewater treatment, respectively,
landfills, and wastewater treatment,
percentage of emissions data reporting occurring on-site at food processing
respectively, occurring on-site at food
from this significant emissions source facilities.
processing facilities.
but avoiding small facilities. N. Glass Production
5. Selection of Data Reporting
For specific information on costs,
Requirements 1. Definition of the Source Category
including unamortized first year capital
expenditures, please refer to section 4 of Refer to Sections V.C, V.HH, and V.II Glass is a common commercial item
the RIA and the RIA cost appendix. of this preamble for reporting that is produced by melting a mixture of
minerals and other substances, then using borosilicate or emissions include both process-related
cooling the molten materials in a aluminoborosilicate recipes, which can emissions (CO2) and on-site stationary
manner that prevents crystallization. consist primarily of silica and boric combustion emissions (CO2, CH4, and
Glass is typically classified as container oxides, along with varying amounts of N2O) from 374 glass manufacturing
glass, flat (or window) glass, or pressed soda, lime, alumina, and other minor facilities across the U.S. and Puerto
and blown glass. Pressed and blown ingredients. Other formulations used in Rico. Process-related emissions account
glass includes textile fiberglass, which the production of specialty glasses for 1.65 million metric tons CO2, or 37
is used primarily as a reinforcement include aluminosilicate and lead silicate percent of the total, while on-site
material in a variety of products, as well formulations. stationary combustion sources account
as other types of glass. Wool fiberglass, Major carbonates used in the for the remaining 2.78 million metric
which is commonly used for insulation, production of glass are limestone tons CO2e emissions.
is generally classified separately from (CaCO3), dolomite (CaMg(CO3)2), and For additional background
textile fiberglass and other pressed and soda ash (Na2CO3). The use of these information on glass manufacturing,
blown glass. However, for the purposes carbonates in the furnace during glass refer to the Glass Manufacturing TSD
of GHG reporting, wool fiberglass manufacturing results in a complex (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–014).
production is included in the glass high-temperature reaction that leads to
process-related GHG emissions. Glass 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
manufacturing source category.
Glass can be produced using a variety manufacturers may also use recycled In developing the threshold for glass
of raw material formulations. Most scrap glass (cullet) in the production of manufacturing, we considered an
commercial glass is made using a soda- glass, thereby reducing the carbonate emissions-based threshold of 1,000
lime glass formulation, which consists input to the process and resulting GHG metric tons CO2e, 10,000 metric tons
of silica (SiO2), soda (Na2O), and lime emissions. CO2e, 25,000 metric tons CO2e, and
(CaO), with small amounts of alumina National emissions from glass 100,000 metric tons CO2e. Table N–1 of
(Al2O3), magnesia (MgO), and other manufacturing were estimated to be 4.43 this preamble summarizes the emissions
minor ingredients. Several specialty million metric tons CO2e (0.1 percent of and number of facilities that would be
glasses, including fiberglass, are made U.S. GHG emissions) in 2005. These covered under these various thresholds.
TABLE N–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR GLASS MANUFACTURING

Threshold level emissions Total number
metric tons CO2e/yr metric tons of facilities Metric tons Percent Number Percent
CO2e/yr CO2e/yr
1,000 ........................................................ 4,425,269 374 4,336,892 98 217 58

10,000 ...................................................... 4,425,269 374 4,012,319 91 158 42
25,000 ...................................................... 4,425,269 374 2,243,583 51 55 15
100,000 .................................................... 4,425,269 374 207,535 5 1 0.3
The glass manufacturing industry is the emissions, while impacting a production. A third option is based on
heterogeneous in terms of the types of relatively small portion of the industry. measuring the carbonate input to the
facilities. There are some relatively For a full discussion of the threshold furnace. The final option uses direct
large, emissions-intensive facilities, but analysis, please refer to the Glass measurement to estimate emissions.
small artisan shops are common as well. Manufacturing TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR– Option 1. The first production-based
For example, at a 1,000 metric tons 2008–0508–014). For specific option we considered applies a default
CO2e threshold, 98 percent of emissions information on costs, including emission factor to the total quantity of
would be covered, with only 58 percent unamortized first year capital all glass produced, correcting for the
expenditures, please refer to section 4 of amount of cullet supplied to the
of facilities being required to report.
the RIA and the RIA cost appendix. process.
The proposed threshold for reporting Option 2. The second production-
emissions from glass manufacturing is 3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring based approach we considered applies
25,000 metric tons CO2e. We are Methods default emission factors to each of the
proposing a 25,000 metric tons CO2e types of glass produced at the facility
threshold to reduce the compliance Many of the domestic and (e.g., container, flat, pressed and blown,
burden on small businesses, while still international GHG monitoring and fiberglass).
including half of the GHG emissions guidelines and protocols include Option 3. The carbonate-input
methodologies for estimating process- approach calculates emissions based on
from the industry. In comparison to the
related CO2 emissions from glass actual input data and the mass fractions
100,000 metric tons CO2e threshold, the
manufacturing (e.g., the 2006 IPCC of the carbonates that are volatilized and
25,000 metric tons CO2e threshold Guidelines, U.S. Inventory, the emitted as CO2. More specifically, this
achieves reporting of 11 times more Technical Guidelines for the DOE option considers the type, quantity, and
emissions while requiring less than 15 1605(b), and the EU Emissions Trading mass fraction of carbonate inputs to the
percent of the facilities to report. System). These methodologies coalesce furnace and develops a facility-specific
Compared to the 10,000 metric tons around four different options. Two emission factor.
CO2e threshold, the 25,000 metric tons options are output-based (production- Option 4. This approach directly
CO2e threshold captures more than half based): One applies appropriate measures emissions using a CEMS.
of those emissions, but only requires a emission factors to the type of glass CEMS can be used to measure both
third of the number of reporters. We produced, and the other applies a combustion-related and process-related
consider this a significant coverage of default emission factor to total glass CO2 emissions from glass melting
furnaces. These emissions generally are the supplier, facilities can assume a regarding carbonate-based mineral
exhausted through a common furnace value of 1.0 for the mass fraction of the content and degree of calcination.
stack. Therefore, separate CEMS would carbonate-based mineral in the As part of normal business practices,
not be needed to quantify both types of carbonate-based raw material. We also glass manufacturing plants maintain the
emissions from glass melting furnaces. propose that emissions are estimated records that would be needed to
Proposed Option. Under the proposed under the assumption that 100 percent calculate emissions under the proposed
rule, if you are required to use an of the carbon in the carbonate-based raw option. Given the greater accuracy
existing CEMS to meet the requirements materials is volatilized and released associated with the input method and
outlined in proposed 40 CFR part 98, from the furnace as CO2. Using the the minimal additional burden, we have
subpart C, you would be required to use carbonate-based mineral mass fractions, determined that this requirement would
CEMS to estimate CO2 emissions. Where the carbonate-based raw material feed not add additional burden to current
the CEMS capture all combustion- and rates, and the emission factors, the mass practices at the facility, while providing
process-related CO2 emissions, you emissions of CO2 emitted from a glass accurate estimates of process-based CO2
would be required to follow the melting furnace can be determined. emissions.
requirements of proposed 40 CFR part Using values of 1.0 for the carbonate- The various approaches to monitoring
98, subpart C to estimate CO2 emissions based mineral mass fractions is based on GHG emissions are elaborated in the
from the industrial source. the assumption that the raw materials Glass Manufacturing TSD (EPA–HQ–
For facilities that do not currently consist of 100 percent of the respective OAR–2008–0508–014).
have CEMS that meet the requirements carbonate-based mineral (i.e., the 4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating
outlined in proposed 40 CFR part 98, limestone charged to the furnace Missing Data
subpart C, or where the CEMS would consists of 100 percent CaCO3, the
not adequately account for process dolomite charged consists of 100 To estimate process emissions of CO2
emissions, the proposed monitoring percent CaMg(CO3)2, and the soda ash based on carbonate input, data are
method would require estimating consists of 100 percent Na3CO3). Using needed on the carbonate chemical
combustion emissions and process this assumption generally overestimates analysis of the carbonate-based raw
emissions separately. For combustion CO2 emissions. However, given the materials and the carbonate-based raw
emissions, you would be required to relative purity of the raw materials used material input rate (process feed rate).
follow the requirements of proposed 40 to produce glass, this method provides Glass manufacturing facilities must
CFR part 98, subpart C to estimate accurate estimates of process CO2 monitor raw material feed rate carefully
emissions of CO2, CH4 and N2O from emissions from glass melting furnaces, in order to maintain product quality.
stationary combustion. For process while avoiding the costs associated with Therefore, we do not expect missing
emissions, the carbonate input approach sampling and analysis of the raw data on raw material input to be an
(Option 3) is proposed. This section of materials. issue. However, if these data were
the preamble provides only those We have concluded that the carbonate missing, we propose requiring facilities
procedures for calculating and reporting input method specified in the proposed to use average data from the previous
process-related emissions. option is more certain as it involves and following months for the mass of
To estimate process CO2 emissions measuring the consumption of each carbonate-based raw materials charged
from glass melting furnaces, we propose carbonate material charged to a glass to the furnace. Given that glass furnaces
that facilities measure the type, melting furnace. According to the 2006 generally operate continuously at a
quantity, and mass fraction of carbonate IPCC Guidelines, the uncertainty relatively constant production rate, we
inputs to each furnace and apply the involved in the proposed carbonate do not expect much variation in the
appropriate emission factors for the input approach is 1 to 3 percent; in amounts of carbonates charged to the
carbonates consumed. This method for contrast, the uncertainty with using the furnace from month to month.
determining process emissions is default emission factor and cullet ratio Furthermore, it would be unusual for a
consistent with the IPCC Tier 3 method. for the production-based approach is 60 glass manufacturing plant to change its
The proposed rule distinguishes percent. glass formulation. Therefore, we believe
between carbonate-based minerals and We considered use of a CO2 CEMS using average data from the previous
carbonate-based raw materials used in which does tend to provide the most and following months would provide a
glass production. Carbonate-based raw accurate CO2 emissions measurements reliable estimate of raw materials
materials are fired in the furnace during and can measure both the combustion- charged.
glass manufacturing. These raw and process-related CO2 emissions. For missing data on carbonate-based
materials are typically limestone, which However, given the limited variability mineral mass fractions, we propose
is primarily CaCO3; dolomite, which is in the process inputs and outputs requiring facilities to assume that the
primarily CaMg(CO3)CO2; and soda ash, contributing to emissions from glass mass fraction of each carbonate-based
which is primarily NaCO2CO3. Because production, installation of CEMS would mineral in the carbonate-based raw
it is the calcination of the mineral require significant additional burden to materials is 1.0. This assumption may
fraction of the raw material (e.g., CaCO3 facilities given that few glass facilities result in a slight overestimate of
fraction in limestone) that leads to CO2 currently have CO2 CEMS. emissions, but should still provide a
emissions, the purity of the limestone or We also considered, but decided not reasonably accurate estimate of
other carbonate input is important for to propose, the production-based default emissions for the period with missing
emissions estimation. emission factor-based approach data.
In order to assess the composition of referenced above for quantifying
the carbonate input, we propose that process-related CO2 emissions based on 5. Selection of Data Reporting
facilities use data from the raw material the quantity of glass produced. In Requirements
supplier to determine the carbonate- general, the default emission factor We propose that facilities report total
based mineral mass fraction of the method results in less certainty because annual emissions of CO2 from each
carbonate-based raw materials charged the method involves multiplying affected continuous glass melting
to an affected glass melting furnace. As production data by emission factors that furnace, as well as any stationary fuel
an alternative to using data provided by are based on default assumptions combustion emissions. The proposed
rule would also require facilities to GHG emissions monitoring and percent. These decreases have occurred
report the quantity of each carbonate- calculations were performed correctly. because an increasing fraction of U.S.
based raw material charged to each A full list of records that must be HCFC–22 production capacity has
continuous glass melting furnace in tons retained on site is included in proposed adopted controls to reduce HFC–23
per year, and the quantity of glass 40 CFR part 98, subparts A and N. emissions. Three HCFC–22 production
produced by each continuous glass O. HCFC–22 Production and HFC–23 facilities operated in the U.S. in 2006,
melting furnace. For facilities that Destruction two of which used recapture and/or
calculate process emissions of CO2 thermal oxidation to significantly lower
based on the mass fractions of 1. Definition of the Source Category their HFC–23 emissions. All three
carbonate-based minerals, the proposed This source category includes the plants are part of a voluntary agreement
rule would require facilities to report generation, emissions, sales, and to report and reduce their collective
those values. These data are requested destruction of HFC–23. The source HFC–23 emissions.
because they provide the basis for category includes facilities that produce The production of HCFC–22 and
calculating process-based CO2 emissions HCFC–22, generating HFC–23 in the destruction of HFC–23 causes both
and are needed for us to understand the process. This source category also combustion and HFC–23 emissions.
emissions data and verify the includes facilities that destroy HFC–23, HCFC–22 production and HFC–23
reasonableness of the reported which are sometimes, but not always, destruction facilities are required to
emissions. The data on raw material also facilities that produce HCFC–22. follow the requirements of proposed 40
composition and charge rates are HFC–23 is generated during the CFR part 98, subpart C to estimate
needed to verify process-based production of HCFC–22. HCFC–22 is emissions of CO2, CH4 and N2O from
emissions of CO2. The data on glass primarily employed in refrigeration and stationary fuel combustion. This section
production are needed to verify that the A/C systems and as a chemical of the preamble provides only those
reported quantities of raw materials feedstock for manufacturing synthetic procedures for calculating and reporting
charged to continuous furnaces are polymers. Because HCFC–22 depletes generation, emissions, sales, and
reasonable. The production data also stratospheric O3, its production for non- destruction of HFC–23.
can be used to identify potential feedstock uses is scheduled to be
For additional background
outliers. phased out by 2020 under the CAA.
information on HCFC–22 production,
A full list of data to be reported is Feedstock production, however, is
please refer to the HCFC–22 Production
included in proposed 40 CFR part 98, permitted to continue indefinitely.
HCFC–22 is produced by the reaction and HFC–23 Destruction TSD (EPA–
subparts A and N.
of chloroform (CHCl3) and hydrogen HQ–OAR–2008–0508–015).
6. Selection of Records That Must Be fluoride (HF) in the presence of a 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
Retained catalyst, SbClB5. In the reaction, the
In addition to the data to be reported, chlorine in the chloroform is replaced We propose that all facilities
we propose that facilities retain monthly with fluorine, creating HCFC–22. Some producing HCFC–22 be required to
records of the data used to calculate of the HCFC–22 is over-fluorinated, report under this rule. Facilities
GHG emissions. This would include producing HFC–23. Once separated destroying HFC–23 but not producing
records of the amounts of each from the HCFC–22, the HFC–23 may be HCFC–22 would be required to report if
carbonate-based raw material charged to vented to the atmosphere as an they destroyed more than 25,000 metric
a continuous glass melting furnace and unwanted by-product, captured for use tons CO2e of HFC–23.
glass production (by type). This in a limited number of applications, or For HCFC–22 production facilities,
requirement would be consistent with destroyed. we considered emission-based
current business practices and the 2006 U.S. emissions of HFC–23 from thresholds of 1,000 metric tons CO2e,
reporting requirements for emissions of HCFC–22 production were estimated to 10,000 metric tons CO2e, 25,000 metric
other pollutants for the glass be 13.8 million metric tons CO2e. This tons CO2e and 100,000 metric tons CO2e
manufacturing industry. quantity represents a 13 percent decline and capacity-based thresholds
The proposed rule also would require from 2005 emissions and a 62 percent equivalent to these. The capacity-based
facilities to retain the results of all tests decline from 1990 emissions despite an thresholds are shown in Table O–1 of
used to determine carbonate-based 11 percent increase in HCFC–22 this preamble, and are based on full
mineral mass fractions, as well as any production since 1990. Both declines utilization of HCFC–22 capacity and the
other supporting information used in are primarily due to decreases in the emission rate given for older plants in
the calculation of GHG emissions. These HFC–23 emission rate. The ratio of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines. (One plant is
data are directly used to calculate HFC–23 emissions to HCFC–22 relatively new, but the emission rate for
emissions that are reported and are production has decreased from 0.022 to older plants was used to be consistent
necessary to enable verification that the 0.0077 since 1990, a reduction of 66 and somewhat conservative.)
TABLE O–1. CAPACITY-BASED THRESHOLDS

Threshold level (HCFC–22 capacity in emissions Total national
tons) (metric tons facilities Metric tons
CO2e) CO2e/yr Percent Facilities Percent
2 ............................................................... 13,848,483 3 13,848,483 100 3 100

21 ............................................................. 13,848,483 3 13,848,483 100 3 100
53 ............................................................. 13,848,483 3 13,848,483 100 3 100
214 ........................................................... 13,848,483 3 13,848,483 100 3 100
Our analysis showed that all of the voluntary program for HCFC–22 streams and on measurements of the
facilities, which have capacities ranging manufacturers, the WRI/WBCSD flow rates of those streams, although the
from 18,000 to 100,000 metric tons of protocols, the TRI, the TSCA Inventory proposed frequency of these
HCFC–22, exceeded all of the capacity- Update Rule, The DOE 1605(b) measurements varies.
based thresholds by wide margins. The Voluntary Reporting Program, EPA Proposed Methods for Estimating
smallest plant exceeded the largest Climate Leaders, and TRI. HFC–23 Emissions from Facilities that
capacity-based threshold by a factor of We also considered the findings and Do Not Use a Thermal Oxidizer or
85. conclusions of a recent report that Facilities that Use a Thermal Oxidizer
We are not presenting a table for closely reviewed the methods that that is Not Directly Connected to the
emission-based thresholds because we facilities use to estimate and assure the HCFC–22 Production Equipment. Under
do not have facility-specific emissions quality of their estimates of HCFC–22 the proposed rule, you would be
information. (Under the voluntary production and HFC–23 emissions. As required to:
emission reduction agreement, total noted above, the production facilities (1) Monitor the concentration of HFC–
emissions from the three facilities are currently estimate and report these 23 in the reaction product stream
aggregated by a third party, who submits quantities to us (across all three plants) containing the HFC–23 (which could be
only the total to us.) Since two of the under a voluntary agreement. The either the HCFC–22 or the HCl product
three facilities destroy or capture most report, by RTI International, is entitled stream) on at least a daily basis. This
or all of their HFC–23 by-product, one ‘‘Verification of Emission Estimates of proposed requirement is intended to
or both of them probably have emissions HFC–23 from the Production of HCFC– account for day-to-day fluctuations in
below at least some of the emission- 22: Emissions from 1990 through 2006’’ the rate at which HFC–23 is generated;
based thresholds discussed above. and is available in the docket for this this rate can vary depending on process
However, if the thermal oxidizers rulemaking. conditions.
malfunctioned, were not operated The 2008 Verification Report found (2) Monitor the mass flow of the
properly, or were unused for some other that the estimation methods used by the product stream containing the HFC–23
reason, emissions of HFC–23 from each three HCFC–22 facilities currently either directly or by weighing the other
of the plants could easily exceed all operating in the U.S. were all equivalent reaction product. The other product
thresholds. Reporting is therefore to IPCC Tier 3 methods. Under the Tier could be either HCFC–22 or HCl. Plants
3 methodology, facility-specific would be required to make or sum these
important both for tracking the
emissions are estimated based on direct measurements on at least a daily basis.
considerable emissions of facilities that
measurement of the HFC–23 If the HCFC–22 or HCl product were
do not use thermal oxidation and for
concentration and the flow rate of the measured significantly downstream of
verifying the performance of thermal
streams, accounting for the use of the reactor (e.g., at storage tanks or the
oxidation where it is used. For this
emissions abatement devices (thermal shipping dock), facilities would be
reason, we propose that all HCFC–22
oxidizers) where they are used. In required to add a factor that accounted
manufacturers report their HFC–23
general, Tier 3 methods for this source for losses to the measurement. This
emissions.
category yield far more accurate factor would be 1.5 percent or another
We are aware of one facility that
estimates than Tier 2 or Tier 1 methods. factor that could be demonstrated, to the
destroys HFC–23 but does not produce
Even at the Tier 3 level, however, the satisfaction of the Administrator, to
HCFC–22. Although we do not know the
emissions estimation methods used by account for losses. This adjustment is
precise quantity of HFC–23 destroyed
the three facilities differed significantly intended to account for upstream
by this facility, the Agency has product losses, which are estimated to
in their levels of absolute uncertainty.
concluded that the facility destroys a range from one to two percent. Without
The uncertainty of the one facility that
substantial share of the HFC–23 the adjustment, HCFC–22 production
does not thermally destroy its HFC–23
generated by the largest HCFC–22 and therefore HFC–23 generation at
emissions dominates the uncertainty for
production facility in the U.S. If the affected facilities would be
the national emissions from this source
destruction facility destroys even one systematically underestimated
category.
percent of this HFC–23, it is likely to (negatively biased). A one-to two-
In general, the methods proposed in
destroy considerably more than the percent underestimate could translate
this rule are very similar to the
proposed threshold of 25,000 metric into an underestimate of HFC–23
procedures already being undertaken by
tons CO2e. emissions of 100,000 metric tons CO2e
the facilities to estimate HFC–23
For additional background or more for each affected facility.
emissions and to assure the quality of
information on the threshold analysis We request comment on this proposed
these estimates. The differences (and the
for HCFC–22 production, please refer to approach for compensating for the
rationale for them) are discussed in the
the HCFC–22 Production and HFC–23 negative bias caused by HCFC–22
HCFC–22 Production and HFC–23
Destruction TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– emissions. We specifically request
Destruction TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–
0508–015). For specific information on comment on the 1.5 percent factor,
0508–015).
costs, including unamortized first year which is the midpoint of the one-to-two-
capital expenditures, please refer to b. Proposed Monitoring Methods percent range of product loss rates cited
section 4 of the RIA and the RIA cost This section of the preamble includes by the affected facility. We also request
appendix. two proposed monitoring methods for comment on what methods and data
3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring HCFC–22 production facilities and one would be required to verify a loss rate
Methods for HFC–23 destruction facilities. The other than 1.5 percent, if a facility
proposed monitoring methods differ for wished to demonstrate a lower loss rate.
a. Review of Monitoring Methods HCFC–22 facilities that do and do not One option would be a mass-balance
In developing these proposed use a thermal oxidizer connected to the approach using measurements with very
requirements, we reviewed several HCFC–22 production equipment. All fine precisions (e.g., 0.2 percent or
protocols and guidance documents, the monitoring methods rely on better).
including the 2006 IPCC Guidelines, measurements of HFC–23 (3) Facilities that do not use a thermal
guidance developed under our concentrations in process or emission oxidizer connected to the HCFC–22
production equipment would also be in HCFC–22 production rates since the malfunctions (including both the
required to estimate the mass of HFC– measurements occurred. Tests would process equipment and any thermal
23 produced either by multiplying the have to be conducted in accordance oxidation equipment) can be significant
HFC–23 concentration measurement by with EPA Method 18 of 40 CFR part 60, sources of emissions, and the Agency
the mass flow of the stream containing Appendix A–6, Measurement of believes that emissions during these
both the HFC–23 and the other product Gaseous Organic Compounds by Gas process disturbances should therefore
or by multiplying the ratio of the Chromatography. Although HFC–23 be tracked.
concentrations of HFC–23 and of the emissions from process vents are Precision and Accuracy
other product by the mass of the other believed to be quite low, this monitoring Requirements. We are proposing to
product. would ensure that any year-to-year require that HCFC–22 production
(4) Facilities would also be required variability in the emission rate was facilities and HFC–23 destruction
to measure the masses of HFC–23 sold captured by the reporting. Finally, to facilities monitor the masses that would
or sent to other facilities for destruction. estimate emissions from the thermal be reported under this rule using
This step would ensure that any losses oxidizer, you would be required to flowmeters, weigh scales, or a
of HFC–23 during filling of containers apply the DE of the oxidizer to the mass combination of volumetric and density
were included in the HFC–23 emission of HFC–23 fed into the oxidizer. measurements with an accuracy and
estimates for facilities that capture Destruction. Under the proposed rule, precision of 1.0 percent of full scale or
HFC–23 for use as a product or for if you use thermal oxidation to destroy better. Our understanding is that some
transfer to a destruction facility. HFC–23 you would be required to HCFC–22 production facilities currently
(5) Facilities would also be required measure the quantities of HFC–23 fed use devices with this level of accuracy
to estimate the HFC–23 emitted by into the oxidizer. You would also be and precision. However, flowmeters
subtracting the masses of HFC–23 sold required to account for any decreases in with considerably better precisions are
or sent for destruction from the mass of the DE of the oxidizer that occurred available, e.g., 0.2 percent. We request
HFC–23 generated. when the oxidizer was not operating comment on the option of requiring
This calculation assumes that all properly (as defined in State or local plants to use flowmeters or scales with
production that is not sold or sent to permitting requirements and/or oxidizer an accuracy and precision of 0.2 percent
another facility for destruction is manufacturer specifications). Finally, or some other precision better than 1
emitted. Such emissions may be the you would be required to perform percent. Given the large quantities of
result of the packaging process; annual HFC–23 concentration HFC–23 generated by each plant, this
additional emissions can be attributed measurements by gas chromatography to higher precision may be appropriate.
to the number of flanges in a line and confirm that emissions from the We are also proposing to require that
other on-site equipment that is specific oxidizer were as low as expected based HCFC–22 production facilities and
to each facility. on the rated DE of the device. If HFC–23 destruction facilities measure
Proposed Methods for Estimating emissions were found to be higher, then concentrations using equipment and
HFC–23 Emissions from Plants that Use facilities would have the option of using methods with an accuracy and precision
a Thermal Oxidizer Connected to the the DE implied by the most recent of 5 percent or better at the
HCFC–22 Production Equipment. Under measurements or of conducting more concentrations of the samples.
the proposed rule, you would be extensive measurements of the DE of the Calibration Requirements. Under the
required to estimate HFC–23 emissions device. proposed rule, if you produce HCFC–22
from equipment leaks, process vents, As discussed in the HCFC–22 or destroy HFC–23 you would be
and the thermal oxidizer. To estimate Production and HFC–23 Destruction required to perform the following
emissions from leaks, you would be TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–015), activities to assure the quality of their
required to estimate the number of leaks the initial testing and parametric measurements and estimates:
using EPA Method 21 of 40 CFR part 60, monitoring that facilities currently (1) Calibrate gas chromatographs used
Appendix A–7 and a leak definition of perform on their oxidizers provides to determine the concentration of HFC–
10,000 ppmv. Leaks registering above general assurance that the oxidizer is 23 by analyzing, on a monthly basis,
and below 10,000 ppmv would be performing correctly. However, the certified standards with known HFC–23
assigned different default emission proposed requirement to measure HFC– concentrations that are in the same
rates, depending on the component and 23 concentrations at the oxidizer outlet range (percent levels) as the process
service (gas or light liquid). These leak would provide additional assurance at samples. This proposed requirement is
rates would be drawn from Table 2–5 relatively low cost. Even a one- or two- intended to verify the accuracy and
from the Protocol for Equipment Leak percent decline in the DE of the oxidizer precision of gas chromatographs at the
Estimates (EPA–453/R–95–017) and could lead to emissions of over 100,000 concentrations of interest; calibration at
data on the concentration of HFC–23 in metric tons CO2e, making this a other concentrations does not verify this
the process stream.78 (The relevant particularly important factor to monitor accuracy with the same level of
portions of Table 2–5 are included in accurately. assurance. The proposed requirement is
the proposed regulatory text for this Startups, shutdowns, and similar to requirements in protocols for
rule.) To estimate emissions from malfunctions. Under the proposed rule, the use of gas chromatography, such as
process vents, you would be required to if you produce HCFC–22 you would be EPA Method 18, Measurement of
use the results of annual emissions tests required to account for HFC–23 Gaseous Organic Compound Emissions
at process vents, adjusting for changes production and emissions that occur as by Gas Chromatography.
a result of startups, shutdowns, and (2) Initially verify each weigh scale,
78 Although EPA recognizes that the proposed malfunctions. This would be done flow meter, and combination of
method for estimating emissions from equipment either by recording HFC–23 production volumetric and density measurements
leaks is rather uncertain, EPA believes that the level and emissions during these events, or used to measure quantities that are to be
of precision is not unreasonable given the small size documenting that these events do not reported under this rule, and calibrate it
of the HFC–23 emissions that would be estimated
using the method. These emissions are estimated to
result in significant HFC–23 production thereafter at least every year. We request
account for a fraction of a percent of U.S. HFC–23 and/or emissions. Depending on the comment on these proposed
emissions from this source. circumstances, startups, shutdowns, and requirements.
4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating that are permanently removed from the P. Hydrogen Production
Missing Data process, and the method for tracking
We are proposing that in the cases startups, shutdowns, and malfunctions
and HFC–23 generation/emissions Approximately nine million metric
when an upstream flow meter (i.e., near tons of hydrogen are produced in the
reactor outlet) is ordinarily used but is during these events. You would also be
required to report the names and U.S. annually. Hydrogen is used for
not available for some period, the industrial applications such as
facility can compensate by using addresses of facilities to which any
HFC–23 was sent for destruction, and petrochemical production, metallurgy,
downstream production measures (e.g., and food processing. Some of the largest
quantity shipped) and adding 1.5 the quantities sent to each.
users of hydrogen are ammonia
percent to account for product losses. If Where HCFC–22 production facilities production facilities, petroleum
HFC–23 concentration measurements have estimated missing data, you would refineries, and methanol production
are unavailable for some period, we be required to report the reason the data facilities.
propose that the facility use the average were missing, the length of time the data About 95 percent of all hydrogen
of the concentration measurements from were missing, the method used to produced in the U.S. today is made from
just before and just after the period of estimate the missing data, and the natural gas via steam methane
missing data. estimates of those data. Where the reforming. This process consists of two
There is one proposed exception to missing data was estimated by a method basic chemical reactions: (1)
these requirements: If either method other than one of those specified, the Reformation of the CH4 feedstock with
would result in a significant under- or owner or operator would be required to high temperature steam supplied by
overestimate of the missing parameter report why the specified method would burning natural gas to obtain a synthesis
(e.g., because the monitoring failure was lead to a significant under- or gas (CH4 + H2O = CO + 3H2); and (2)
linked to a process disturbance that is overestimate of the parameter(s) and the Using a water-gas shift reaction to form
likely to have significantly increased the rationale for the methods used to hydrogen and CO2 from the carbon
HFC–23 generation rate), then the estimate the missing data. monoxide produced in the first step (CO
facility would be required to develop an + H2O = CO2 + H22).
If you destroy HFC–23, you would be
alternative estimate of the parameter Other processes used for hydrogen
required to report the mass of HFC–23
and explain why and how it developed production include steam naptha
fed into the thermal oxidizer, the mass
that estimate. reforming, coal or biomass gasification,
of HFC–23 destroyed, and the mass of
We request comment on these partial oxidation of coal or
methods for estimating missing data. We HFC–23 emitted from the thermal
oxidizer. You would also be required to hydrocarbons, autothermal reforming,
also request comment on the option of electrolysis of water, recovery of
estimating missing production data submit the results of your annual HFC–
23 concentration measurements at the byproduct hydrogen from electrolytic
based on consumption of reactants, cells used to produce chlorine and other
assuming complete stoichiometric outlet of the oxidizer. In addition, you
would be required to submit a one-time products, and dissociation of ammonia.
conversion. Hydrogen is produced in large
report similar to that required under
5. Selection of Data Reporting EPA’s stratospheric protection quantities at approximately 77 merchant
Requirements regulations at 40 CFR 82.13(j). hydrogen production facilities (which
produce hydrogen to sell) and 145
If you produce HCFC–22 and do not We propose that facilities report these captive hydrogen production facilities
use a thermal oxidizer connected to the data either because the data are (which consume hydrogen at the site
HCFC–22 production equipment, you necessary to verify facilities’ where it is produced, e.g. petroleum
would be required to report the total calculations of HFC–23 generation, refineries, ammonia, and methanol
mass of the HFC–23 generated in metric emissions, or destruction or because the facilities). Hydrogen is also produced in
tons, the mass of any HFC–23 packaged data allow us to implement other QA small quantities at numerous other
for sale in metric tons, the mass of any checks (e.g., calculation of an HFC–23/ locations.
HFC–23 sent off site for destruction in HCFC–22 generation factor that can be National emissions from hydrogen
metric tons, and the mass of HFC–23 compared across facilities and over production were estimated to be
emitted in metric tons. If you produce time). We request comment on these approximately 60 million metric tons
HCFC–22 and destroy HFC–23 using a proposed reporting requirements. CO2 (1 percent of U.S. GHG emissions)
thermal oxidizer connected to the annually.
HCFC–22 production equipment, you 6. Selection of Records That Must Be
Retained The source category covered by the
would be required to report the mass of hydrogen production subpart of the
HFC–23 emitted from the thermal If you produce HCFC–22, you would proposed rule is merchant hydrogen
oxidizer, the mass of HFC–23 emitted be required to keep records of the data production. CO2 emissions from captive
from process vents, and the mass of used to estimate emissions and records hydrogen production facilities at
HFC–23 emitted from equipment leaks, documenting the initial and periodic ammonia facilities, petrochemical
in metric tons. calibration of the gas chromatographs, facilities, and petroleum refineries are
In addition, if you produce HCFC–22 scales, and flowmeters used to measure covered in proposed 40 CFR part 98,
you would also be required to submit the quantities reported under this rule. subparts G, X, and Y, respectively.
the following supplemental data, as For additional background
applicable, for QA purposes: Annual If you destroy HFC–23, you would be
information on hydrogen production,
HCFC–22 production, annual required to keep records of information
please refer to the Hydrogen Production
consumption of reactants (including documenting your one-time and annual
TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–016).
factors to account for quantities that reports.
typically remain unreacted), by reactant, These records are necessary to enable 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
annual mass of materials other than verification that the GHG emissions In developing the threshold for
HCFC–22 and HFC–23 (i.e., unreacted monitoring and calculations were hydrogen production, we considered
reactants, HCl and other byproducts) performed correctly. emissions-based thresholds of 1,000
metric tons CO2e, 10,000 metric tons In selecting a threshold, we Table P–1 of this preamble illustrates
CO2e, 25,000 metric tons CO2e and considered emissions data from the emissions and facilities that would
100,000 metric tons CO2e. This merchant hydrogen facilities only, be covered under these various
threshold is based on combined which together account for an estimated thresholds.
combustion and process CO2 emissions 15.2 million metric tons CO2e in 2006.
at the hydrogen production facility.
TABLE P–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR HYDROGEN PRODUCTION

H2 Production
CO2 Threshold level (metric tons CO2e/year) capacity (tons Tons CO2e/
H2/year) Percent Number Percent
year
No threshold ......................................................................... 0 15,226,620 100.0 77 100

1,000 .................................................................................... 116 15,225,220 100.0 73 95
10,000 .................................................................................. 1,160 15,130,255 99.4 51 66
25,000 .................................................................................. 2,900 14,984,365 98.4 41 53
100,000 ................................................................................ 11,600 14,251,265 93.6 30 39
The hydrogen production industry is reporting under this subpart. This calculation procedures, monitoring and
heterogeneous in terms of the types of approach is consistent with DOE’s QA/QC methods, missing data
facilities. There are some relatively 1605(b) ‘‘A’’ rated method and the procedures, reporting requirements, and
large, emissions intensive facilities, but CARB Mandatory GHG Emissions recordkeeping requirements of proposed
small facilities are common as well. At Reporting Program. 40 CFR part 98, subpart C to estimate
a 25,000 ton threshold, although 98.4 Option 2. Feedstock material balance combustion-related emissions from each
percent of emissions would be covered, method. This method accounts for the hydrogen production unit and any other
only 53 percent of facilities would be difference between the quantity and stationary combustion units. This
required to report. carbon content of all feedstock delivered section of the preamble provides only
The proposed threshold for reporting to the facility and of all products leaving those procedures for calculating and
emissions from hydrogen production is the facility. This approach is consistent reporting process-related CO2 emissions.
25,000 metric tons CO2e. We are with IPCC Tier 3 methods for similar For CO2 collected and used onsite or
proposing a 25,000 metric tons CO2e processes (i.e., steam reformation in transferred offsite, you must follow the
threshold to reduce the compliance ammonia production), the DOE 1605(b) methodology provided in proposed 40
burden on small businesses, while still ‘‘A’’ rated method, and the CARB CFR part 98, subpart PP of this part
including a majority of GHG emissions Mandatory GHG Emissions Reporting (Suppliers of CO2).
from the industry. Program. The feedstock material balance
For a full discussion of the threshold Based on our review of the above method entails measurements of the
analysis, please refer to the Hydrogen approaches, we propose both methods quantity and carbon content of all
Production TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– for quantifying GHG emissions from feedstock delivered to the facility and of
0508–016). For specific information on hydrogen production, to be all products leaving the facility, with
costs, including unamortized first year implemented depending on current the assumption that all the carbon
capital expenditures, please refer to circumstances at your facility. If you are entering the facility in the feedstock that
section 4 of the RIA and the RIA cost required to use an existing CEMS to is not captured and sold outside the
appendix. meet the requirements outlined in facility is converted to CO2 and emitted.
proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C, you The quantity of feedstock consumed
3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring would be required to use CEMS to must be measured continuously using a
Methods estimate CO2 emissions. Where the flowmeter. The carbon fraction in the
Several domestic and international CEMS capture combustion- and process- feedstock may be provided as part of an
GHG monitoring guidelines and related CO2 emissions you would be ultimate analysis performed by the
protocols include methodologies for required to follow the calculation supplier (e.g., the local gas utility in the
estimating process-related emissions procedures, monitoring and QA/QC case of natural gas feedstock). If the
from hydrogen production (e.g., the methods, missing data procedures, feedstock supplier does not provide the
American Petroleum Institute reporting requirements, and gas composition or ultimate analysis
Compendium, the DOE 1605(b), and the recordkeeping requirements of proposed data, the facility would be required to
CARB Mandatory GHG Emissions 40 CFR part 98, subpart C to estimate analyze the carbon content of the
Reporting Program). These methods CO2 emissions from the industrial feedstock on a monthly basis using the
coalesce around variants of two source. Also, refer to proposed 40 CFR appropriate test method in proposed 40
methods for merchant hydrogen part 98, subpart C to estimate CFR 98.7.
production facilities: Direct combustion-related emissions from fuels We also considered three other
measurement of CO2 emissions by not captured in the CEMS, as well as methods for quantifying process-related
CEMS, and the feedstock material CH4 and N2O. emissions. The first method requires
balance method. For facilities that do not currently direct measurement of emissions by
Option 1. Direct measurement. The have CEMS that meet the requirements CEMS from all reporting facilities. The
CEMS would capture both combustion outlined in proposed 40 CFR part 98, second method applies a constant
and process-related CO2 emissions from subpart C, or where the CEMS does not proportionality factor, based on the
a hydrogen facility. Facilities that do not measure process emissions, the facility’s historical data on natural gas
currently employ a CEMS could proposed monitoring method is Option consumption, to the facility’s hydrogen
voluntarily elect to install CEMS for 2. You would be required to follow the production rate. The third method we
considered applies a national default 5. Selection of Data Reporting defining the iron and steel production
emission factor to the natural gas Requirements source category to be taconite iron ore
consumption rate at a facility. We propose that facilities submit their processing facilities, integrated iron and
The first method would generally annual CO2, and N2O emissions data. steelmaking facilities, electric arc
increase accuracy of reported data. We Facilities that use CEMS must comply furnace steelmaking facilities that are
invite comment on the practicality of with the procedures specified in not located at integrated iron and steel
adopting the first method. In general, proposed 40 CFR 98.36(d)(iv). In facilities, and cokemaking facilities that
the latter two methods are less certain, are not located at integrated iron and
addition, we propose that facilities
as they involve multiplying production steel facilities. Coke, sinter, and electric
submit the following data on an annual
and feedstock consumption data by arc furnace steel production operations
basis for each process unit. These data
default emission factors based on purity at integrated iron and steel facilities are
are needed for us to understand the
assumptions. part of integrated iron and steel
In contrast, the feedstock material emissions data and verify the
reasonableness of the reported facilities. Direct reduced iron furnaces
balance method is more certain as it are located at and are part of electric arc
involves measuring the consumption emissions, and are the basis of the
furnace steelmaking facilities.
and carbon content of the feedstock feedstock material balance calculation.
Currently, there are 18 integrated iron
The data should include the total
input. Because 95 percent of hydrogen and steel steelmaking facilities that
quantity of feedstock consumed for
is produced using steam methane make iron from iron ore and coke in a
reforming, and the carbon content of hydrogen production, the quantity of
blast furnace and refine the molten iron
natural gas is always within 1 percent CO2 captured for use and the end use,
(and some ferrous scrap) in a basic
of the ratio: One mole of carbon per if known, the monthly analyses of
oxygen furnace to make steel. In
mole of natural gas, the local utility carbon content for each feedstock used
addition, there are over 90 electric arc
QA/QC requirements should be more in hydrogen production, the annual
furnace steelmaking facilities that
than adequate. quantity of hydrogen produced, and the
produce steel primarily from recycled
Given the increase in accuracy of the annual ammonia produced, if ferrous scrap. There are also eight
direct measurement and feedstock applicable. taconite iron ore (pellet) processing
material balance methods coupled with A full list of data to be reported is
facilities, 18 cokemaking facilities,
the minimal additional burden for included in proposed 40 CFR part 98,
seven of which are co-located at
facilities that already employ CEMS, we subparts A and P.
integrated iron and steel facilities, and
propose that facilities utilize the direct 6. Selection of Records That Must Be one direct reduced iron furnace located
measurement method where currently Retained at an electric arc furnace steelmaking
employed, and the feedstock material We propose that each hydrogen facility.
balance method for all facilities that do production facility comply with the The primary operation units that emit
not employ CEMS. We have concluded applicable recordkeeping requirements GHG emissions are blast furnace stoves
that this requirement does not add (24 million metric tons CO2e/yr),
for stationary combustion units in
additional burden to current practices at taconite indurating furnaces, basic
proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C,
the facilities, thereby minimizing costs. oxygen furnaces, electric arc furnaces
which are also discussed in Section V.C
The primary additional burden for (about 5 million metric tons CO2e/yr
of this preamble.
facilities associated with this method Also, we propose that each hydrogen each), coke oven battery combustion
would be in conducting a gas production facility maintain records of stacks (6 million metric tons CO2e/yr),
composition analysis of the feedstock on feedstock consumption and the method and sinter plants (3 million metric tons
a monthly basis, in cases where this used to determine the quantity of CO2e/yr). Smaller amounts of GHG
information is not provided by the feedstock consumption, QA/QC records emissions are produced by coke pushing
supplier. (160,000 metric tons CO2e/yr) and direct
(including calibration records and any
The various approaches to monitoring reduced iron furnaces (140,000 metric
records required by the QAPP), monthly
GHG emissions are elaborated in the tons CO2e/yr).
carbon content analyses, and the Based on production in 2007, GHG
Hydrogen Production TSD (EPA–HQ– method used to determine the carbon
OAR–2008–0508–016). emissions from the source category are
content. A full list of records that must estimated at about 85 million metric
4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating be retained onsite is included in tons CO2e/yr or just over 1 percent of
Missing Data proposed 40 CFR part 98, subparts A total U.S. GHG emissions. Emissions
Sources using CEMS to comply with and P. These records consist of values from both process units (47 million
this rule would be required to comply that are directly used to calculate the metric tons CO2e/yr) and miscellaneous
with the missing data requirements of emissions that are reported and are combustion units (38 million metric
proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C. necessary to enable verification that the tons CO2e/yr) are significant. Small
In the event that a facility lacks GHG emissions monitoring and amounts of N2O and CH4 are also
feedstock supply rates for a certain time calculations were done correctly. emitted during the combustion of
period, we propose that facilities use the Q. Iron and Steel Production different types of fuels.
lesser of the maximum supply rate that Although by-product recovery coke
the unit is capable of processing or the 1. Definition of the Source Category batteries and blast furnaces operations
maximum supply rate that the meter can The iron and steel industry in the U.S. produce coke and pig iron, respectively,
measure. In the event that a monthly is the third largest in the world, we are proposing that their emissions be
value for carbon content is determined accounting for about 8 percent of the reported as required for combustion
to be invalid, an additional sample must world’s raw iron and steel production units in proposed 40 CFR part 98,
be collected and tested. The likelihood and supplying several industrial sectors, subpart C because the majority of their
for missing data is small, since the fuel such as construction (building and GHG emissions originate from fuel
meter and carbon content data are bridge skeletons and supports), vehicle combustion. Emissions from the blast
needed for financial accounting bodies, appliances, tools, and heavy furnace operation occur primarily from
purposes. equipment. In this proposed rule, we are the combustion of blast furnace gas and
natural gas in the blast furnace stoves. Emissions from nonrecovery coke Production TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–
Emissions from by-product recovery batteries do not result from the 0508–017).
coke batteries are generated from the combustion of a fuel input. In the
combustion of coke oven gas in the coke nonrecovery battery, the volatiles that
battery’s underfiring system. In addition evolve as the coal is heated are ignited In evaluating potential thresholds for
to the blast furnace stoves and by- in the crown above the coal mass and iron and steel production, we
product coke battery underfiring in flues used to heat the oven. All of the considered emissions-based thresholds
systems, the other combustion units combustible compounds distilled from of 1,000 metric tons CO2e, 10,000 metric
where fuel is the only source of GHG the coal are burned, and the exhaust tons CO2e, 25,000 metric tons CO2e, and
emissions include boilers, process gases containing CO2 are emitted 100,000 metric tons CO2e per year. This
heaters, reheat and annealing furnaces, through the battery’s combustion stack. threshold is based on combined
flares, flame suppression systems, ladle For all types of coke batteries, a small combustion and process CO2 emissions
reheaters, and other miscellaneous amount of CO2 is formed when the at an iron and steel production facility.
sources. Emissions from these other incandescent coke is pushed from the
Table Q–1 of this preamble illustrates
combustion sources in 2007 are oven, and prior to quenching with
that the various thresholds do not have
estimated at 16.8 million metric tons water, some of the coke burns. The CO2
a significant effect on the amount of
CO2e/yr for integrated iron and steel emissions from taconite plants come
primarily from the indurating furnaces emissions that would be covered. To
facilities, 18.6 million metric tons avoid placing a reporting burden on the
CO2e/yr for electric arc furnace where coal and/or natural gas are
burned in the pelletizing process, and smaller specialty stainless steel
steelmaking facilities, and 2.7 million producers which may operate as small
metric tons CO2e/yr for coke facilities carbon in the process feed materials
(iron ore, limestone, bentonite) is businesses while still requiring the
not located at integrated iron and steel reporting of GHG emissions from those
facilities. As noted, the proposed converted to CO2. The CO2 emissions
from direct reduced iron furnaces result facilities releasing most of the GHG
requirements for combustion units in emissions in this source category, we
proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C from the combustion of natural gas in
the furnace and from the process inputs, are proposing a threshold of 25,000
would apply for estimating the CO2, metric tons CO2e per year for reporting
CH4, and N2O emissions from the primarily from the carbonaceous
materials (such as coal or coke) that is of emissions. This threshold level is
following combustion units: consistent with the threshold level
• By-product recovery coke oven mixed with iron ore. During steelmaking
being proposed for other source
battery combustion stacks. in the basic oxygen furnace, most of the
categories with similar facility size
• Blast furnace stoves. GHGs result from blowing oxygen into
characteristics. We are proposing that
• Boilers. the molten iron to produce steel by
facilities emitting greater than 25,000 in
• Process heaters. removing carbon, primarily as CO2. CO2
the iron and steel production source
• Reheat furnaces. emissions also result from the addition
category would be subject to the
• Annealing furnaces. of fluxing materials and other process
• Flares. inputs that may contain carbon. proposed rule because of the magnitude
• Ladle reheaters. Emissions from electric arc furnaces are of their emissions. All integrated iron
• Other miscellaneous combustion produced by the same mechanisms as and steel facilities and taconite facilities
sources. for basic oxygen furnaces, and in exceed the highest emissions threshold
Emissions from the remaining addition, the consumption of carbon considered. Most electric arc furnace
operation units are generated from the electrodes during the melting and facilities (with the possible exception of
carbon in process inputs and in some refining stages contribute to CO2 about 9 facilities) exceed the 25,000
cases, from fuel combustion in the emissions. metric tons CO2e emissions threshold.
process. The process-related CO2, CH4 Emissions of CH4 and N2O occur from Requiring facilities that emit 25,000
and N2O emissions from the operation the combustion of fuels in both metric tons CO2e a year or more to
units listed below except for coke combustion units and process units. For report would capture nearly 100 percent
pushing would be reported according to fuels that contain CH4, combustion of of the emissions without significantly
the proposed requirements in this CH4 is not complete, and a small increasing the number of affected
section: amount of CH4 is not burned and is facilities.
• Taconite indurating furnaces. emitted. In addition, a small amount of For a full discussion of the threshold
• Nonrecovery coke oven battery N2O can be formed as a by-product of analysis, refer to the Iron and Steel
combustion stacks. combustion from the air (nitrogen and Production TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–
• Coke pushing. oxygen) that is required for combustion. 0508–017). For specific information on
• Basic oxygen furnaces. Additional background information costs, including unamortized first year
• Electric arc furnaces. about GHG emissions from the iron and capital expenditures, please refer to
• Direct reduced iron furnaces. steel production source category is section 4 of the RIA and the RIA cost
• Sinter plants. available in the Iron and Steel appendix.
TABLE Q–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR IRON AND STEEL PRODUCTION

Threshold level metric tons CO2e (metric tons of facilities Metric tons
CO2e) CO2e/yr Percent Number Percent
all in .......................................................... 85,150,877 130 85,150,877 100 130 100

1,000 ........................................................ 85,150,877 130 85,150,877 100 130 100
10,000 ...................................................... 85,150,877 130 85,141,500 100 128 98
25,000 ...................................................... 85,150,877 130 85,013,059 100 121 93
TABLE Q–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR IRON AND STEEL PRODUCTION—Continued

Threshold level metric tons CO2e (metric tons of facilities Metric tons Percent Number Percent
CO2e) CO2e/yr
100,000 .................................................... 85,150,877 130 84,468,696 99.2 111 85
3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring in the EU Emissions Trading System, differences in feedstock or process
Methods and the DOE 1605(b) approach that is operation. Options 3, 4, and 5 are forms
Many domestic and international rated ‘‘A.’’ of the IPCC’s highest tier methodology
GHG monitoring guidelines and Option 4. Develop a site-specific (Tier 3), therefore, we propose these
protocols include methodologies for emission factor based on simultaneous options as equal options. After
estimating emissions from process and and accurate measurements of CO2 consideration of public comments, we
combustion sources (e.g. 2006 IPCC emissions and production rate or may promulgate one or more of the
Guidelines, U.S. Inventory, the WBCSD/ process input rate during representative options or a combination based on the
WRI GHG protocol, DOE 1605(b), TCR, operating conditions. Multiply the site- additional information that is provided.
EU Emissions Trading System, the specific factor by the annual production We considered but decided against
American Iron and Steel Institute rate or appropriate periodic production Options 1 and 2 because the use of
Protocol, International Iron and Steel rate (or process input rate, as default values and lack of direct
Institute Protocol, and Environment appropriate). This approach is included measurements results in a very high
Canada’s mandatory reporting in Environment Canada’s methodologies level of uncertainty in the emission
guidelines). We considered these and might be considered a form of direct estimates. These default approaches
methodologies for measuring or measurement consistent with the IPCC’s would not provide site-specific
estimating GHG emissions from the iron Tier 3 approach. estimates of emissions that would
and steel source category. The following Option 5. Direct and continuous reflect differences in feedstocks,
five options were considered for measurement of CO2 emissions using operating conditions, fuel combustion
reporting process-related CO2 emissions CEMS for CO2 concentration and stack efficiency, variability in fuels and other
from these sources. gas volumetric flow rate based on the differences among facilities. In general,
Option 1. Apply a default emission requirements in 40 CFR part 75. This is we decided against proposing existing
factor based on the type of process and the IPCC Tier 3 approach (direct methodologies that relied on default
an annual activity rate (e.g. quantity of measurement). emission factors or default values for
raw steel, sinter, or direct reduced iron Proposed option. Under this proposed carbon content of materials because the
produced). This option is the same as rule, if you are required to use an differences among facilities described
the IPCC Tier 1 approach. existing CEMS to meet the requirements above could not be discerned, and such
Option 2. Perform a carbon balance of outlined in proposed 40 CFR part 98, default approaches are inherently
all inputs and outputs using default or subpart C, you would be required to use inaccurate for site-specific
typical values for the carbon content of CEMS to estimate CO2 emissions. Where determinations. The use of default
the inputs and outputs. Facility the CEMS capture all combustion- and values is more appropriate for sector
production and other records would be process-related CO2 emissions you wide or national total estimates from
used to determine the annual quantity would be required to follow the aggregated activity data than for
of process inputs and outputs. CO2 requirements of proposed 40 CFR part determining emissions from a specific
emissions from the difference of carbon- 98, subpart C to estimate CO2 emissions facility. According to the IPCC’s 2006
in minus carbon-out, assuming all is from the industrial source. Also, you guidelines, the uncertainty associated
converted to CO2, would be calculated. would use proposed 40 CFR part 98, with default emission factors for
This option is the same as the IPCC Tier subpart C to estimate combustion- Options 1 and 2 is ±25 percent, and the
2 approach, the WRI default approach, related CH4 and N2O. uncertainty in the production data used
and the DOE 1605(b) approach that is If you do not currently have CEMS with the default emission factor is ±10
rated ‘‘B.’’ It is similar to the approach that meet the requirements outlined in percent, which results in a combined
recommended by American Iron and proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C, or overall uncertainty greater than ±25
Steel Institute except that the carbon where the CEMS would not adequately percent. If process-specific carbon
balance for Option 2 is based on the account for process emissions, we contents and actual mass rate data for
individual processes rather than the propose that Options 3, 4 or 5 could be the process inputs and outputs are used
entire plant. implemented. You would be required to (i.e., Option 3) or if direct measurements
Option 3. Perform a monthly carbon follow the requirements of proposed 40 are used (i.e., Options 4 and 5), the
balance of all inputs and outputs using CFR part 98, subpart C to estimate guidelines state that the uncertainty
measurements of the carbon content of emissions of CO2, CH4 and N2O from associated with the emission estimates
specific process inputs and process stationary combustion. This section of would be reduced.
outputs and measure the mass rate of the preamble provides procedures only For Option 3, we are proposing that
process inputs and process outputs. for calculating and reporting process- facilities may estimate process
Calculate CO2 emissions from the related emissions. emissions based on a carbon balance
difference of carbon-in minus carbon- We identified Options 3, 4, and 5 as that uses facility-specific information on
out assuming all is converted to CO2. the approaches that have acceptable the carbon content of process inputs and
This is consistent with an IPCC Tier 3 uncertainty for facility-specific outputs and measurements of the mass
approach (if direct measurements are estimates. All of these options would rate of process inputs and outputs.
not available), the WRI/WBCSD provide insight into different levels of Monthly determinations of the mass of
preferred approach, the approach used emissions caused by facility-specific process inputs and outputs other than
fuels would be required. These data are that should be required, and whether and a new site-specific emission factor
readily available for almost all process (and if so, how) the emissions can be calculated.
inputs and outputs on a monthly basis determined with reasonable certainty. We are also requesting comment on
from purchasing, accounting, and Comments must demonstrate that the the advantages and disadvantages of
production records that are routinely procedures produce results that are Option 4, along with supporting
maintained by each facility. The mass reproducible and clearly specify the documentation. We have concluded that
rates of fuels would be measured sampling methods and QA procedures there may be situations in which the
according to the procedures for fuels in that would ensure accurate results. site-specific emission factor approach
combustion units in proposed 40 CFR For the site-specific emission factor may result in an uncertainty lower than
part 98, subpart C. The carbon content approach (Option 4), the owner or that associated with the carbon balance
of each process input and output other operator may conduct a performance approach and provide more reasonable
than fuels would also be measured each test and determine CO2 emissions from emission estimates. An example is
month. A sample would be taken each all exhaust stacks for the process using nonrecovery coke plants, where a
week, composited for the monthly EPA reference methods to continuously carbon balance approach may result in
analysis, and sent to an independent measure the CO2 concentration and an unacceptably high level of
laboratory for analysis of carbon content stack gas volumetric flow rate during uncertainty from subtracting two very
using the test methods in proposed 40 the test. In addition, either the feed rate large numbers (carbon in with coal and
CFR part 98, subpart A. The carbon of materials into the process or the carbon out with coke) to estimate
content of fuels would be determined production rate during the test would be emissions that could instead be
using the procedures for fuels in measured. The performance test would accurately and directly measured at the
combustion units in proposed 40 CFR be conducted under normal process combustion stack.
part 98, subpart C. The CO2 emissions operating conditions and at a The primary sources of variability that
would be estimated each month using production rate no less than 90 percent affect CO2 emissions from process
the carbon balance equations in the of the process rated capacity. For sources in general are the carbon
proposed rule and then summed to continuous processes (taconite content of the process inputs and fuel
provide the totals for the quarter and for indurating furnaces, non-recovery coke and any changes to the process that alter
the year. batteries, and sinter plants), the testing energy efficiency. For most processes,
While this proposed approach is would cover at least nine hours of the carbon content of process inputs and
consistent with how iron and steel continuous operation. For batch or fuels is consistent and stable, and if a
production facilities are currently cyclic processes (basic oxygen furnaces, process change alters energy efficiency,
developing facility level GHG electric arc furnaces, and direct a re-test could be performed to develop
inventories, there are three components reduction furnaces), the testing would a new emission factor that reflected the
of this approach for which the Agency cover at least nine complete production change. We are requesting comment and
is requesting comment and supporting cycles that start when the furnace is supporting information on the
information. One issue is the ability to being charged and end after steel or iron minimum time or number of production
obtain accurate measurements of the and slag have been tapped. We are cycles needed for testing to develop a
process inputs and outputs, especially proposing testing for nine hours or nine representative emission factor, and how
materials that are bulk solids and production cycles, as applicable, often periodic re-testing should be
molten metal and slag. A second issue because nine tests should provide a required (e.g., annually, quarterly, or
is the ability to obtain representative reasonable measure of variability (i.e., only when there is a process change).
samples of the process inputs and the standard deviation for nine We are also requesting that any
outputs to determine the carbon production cycles or nine 1-hour runs). comments on Option 4 address how
content, especially for non-homogenous If an electric arc furnace is used to changes in process inputs, fuels, or
materials such as iron and steel scrap. produce both carbon steel and low process energy efficiency should be
The third issue is the level of carbon steel (including stainless or accounted for, such as requiring a re-test
uncertainty in the emission estimates specialty steel), separate emission if the carbon content of inputs change
for processes where there is a significant factors would be developed for carbon by more than some specified percent, if
amount of carbon leaving the process steel and low carbon steel. the type or mix of fuel is changed, or if
with product (such as coke plants). The site-specific emission factor for there is a significant change in fuel
These and other factors may result in an the process would be calculated in consumption due to a process change.
unacceptable level of uncertainty, metric tons CO2 per metric ton of feed We are also proposing that you may
especially for certain processes, when or production, as applicable, by use direct measurements, noting that
using the carbon balance approach to dividing the CO2 emission rate by the CEMS (Option 5) provide the lowest
estimate emissions. feed or production rate. The CO2 uncertainty of the three options. This
While we are proposing that emissions for the process would be approach overcomes many of the
emissions from blast furnace stoves and calculated by multiplying the emission limitations associated with other
coke battery combustion stacks be factor by the total amount of feed or options considered such as accounting
reported as would be required for production, as applicable. A new for the variability in emissions due to
combustion sources under proposed 40 performance test would be required changes in the process, feed materials,
CFR part 98, subpart C, we are also each year to develop a new site-specific or fuel over time. It would be applied to
requesting comment on how the carbon emission factor. Whenever there is a stacks that are already equipped with
balance approach (Option 3) could be significant change in fuel type or mix, sampling ports and access platforms;
implemented as an alternative change in the process in a manner that consequently, it is technically feasible
monitoring option for the entire blast affects energy efficiency by more than and cost effective. For those emission
furnace operation and the entire coke 10 percent, or a change in the process sources already equipped with CEMS,
plant operation at integrated iron and feed materials in a manner that changes we are proposing that they be modified
steel facilities. Comments should the carbon content of the feed or fuel by (if necessary) and used to determine
address the advantages, disadvantages, more than 10 percent, a new CO2 emissions for that emission source.
types and frequency of measurements performance test would be conducted We are proposing this requirement
because it provides direct emission furnace gas may be emitted during In addition we propose that facilities
measurements that have low uncertainty infrequent process upsets (called submit the following data to assist in
with only a minimal additional cost ‘‘slips’’) when gas is vented for a short checks for reasonableness and for other
burden. We also request comment, along period or from leaks in the ductwork data quality considerations: Total mass
with supporting documentation, on the that handles the gas. However, the mass for all process inputs and outputs when
advantages and disadvantages of Option of GHG emissions is expected to be the carbon balance is used for specific
5. small because most of the carbon in processes by calendar quarters, site-
We are also proposing that CH4 and blast furnace gas is from carbon specific emission factor for all processes
N2O emissions from the combustion of monoxide, which is not a GHG. Fugitive for which the site-specific emission
fuels in both combustion units and emissions and emissions from control factor approach is used, annual
process units be determined and device stacks may also occur from blast production quantity for taconite pellets,
reported. All of the fuels used at iron furnace tapping, the charging and coke, sinter, iron, raw steel by calendar
and steel production processes are tapping of basic oxygen furnaces and quarters, annual production capacity for
included in the methodologies in electric arc furnaces, ladle metallurgy, taconite pellets, coke, sinter, iron, raw
proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C for desulfurization, etc. However, we have steel, annual operating hours for
N2O and CH4. Consequently, EPA is no information that indicates CO2 is taconite furnaces, coke oven batteries,
proposing to use the same methodology generated from these operations, and a sinter production, blast furnaces, direct
as in proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart review of test reports from systems that reduced iron furnaces, and electric arc
C for determining and reporting capture these emissions show that CO2 furnaces, and the quantity of CO2
emissions of N2O and CH4 from both concentrations are very low (at ambient captured for use and the end use, if
stationary combustion units and process air levels). Fugitive emissions known.
units. containing CH4 may occur from leaks of A full list of data that would be
Miscellaneous Emissions Sources. raw coke oven gas from the coke oven reported is included in proposed 40
Emissions may also occur when the battery during the coking cycle. CFR part 98, subparts A and Q.
incandescent coke is pushed from the However, the mass of these emissions is
coke oven and transported to the expected to be small based on the small 6. Selection of Records That Must Be
quench tower where it is cooled number of leaks that are now allowed Retained
(quenched) with water. A small portion under existing Federal and State In addition to the recordkeeping
of the coke burns during this process standards that regulate these emissions. requirements for general stationary fuel
prior to quenching. We updated the In addition, since these emissions are combustion sources, we propose that
coke oven section of the AP–42 79 not captured in a conveyance, there is the following additional records be kept
compilation of emission factors in May no practical way to measure them. to assist in QA/QC and verification
2008, and the update included an Consequently, we are not proposing that purposes: GHG emission estimates from
emission factor for CO2 emissions fugitive emissions be reported because the iron and steel production process by
developed from 26 tests for particulate we believe their GHG content is calendar quarter, monthly total for all
matter from pushing operations. The negligible and because there is no process inputs and outputs when the
emissions factor (0.008 metric tons CO2e practical way of measuring them. carbon balance is used for specific
per metric ton of coal charged) was However, we welcome public comment, processes, documentation of calculation
derived to account for emissions from along with supporting data and of site-specific emission factor for all
the pushing emission control device and documentation, on whether fugitive processes for which the site-specific
those escaping the capture system. We emissions should be included, and if so, emission factor approach is used,
are proposing that coke facilities use the how these emissions can be estimated. monthly analyses of carbon content, and
AP–42 emission factor to estimate CO2 4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating monthly production quantity for
emissions from coke pushing Missing Data taconite pellets, coke, sinter, iron, and
operations. raw steel.
There are dozens of emission points For process sources that use Option 3
and various types of fugitive emissions, (carbon balance) or Option 4 (site- R. Lead Production
not collected for emission through a specific emission factor), no missing 1. Definition of the Source Category
stack, from the production processes data procedures would apply because
and materials handling and transfer 100 percent data availability would be Lead is a metal used to produce
activities at integrated iron and steel required. For process sources that use various products such as batteries,
facilities. These emissions from iron and Option 5 (direct measurement by ammunition, construction materials,
steel plants have been of environmental CEMS), the missing data procedures electrical components and accessories,
interest primarily because of the would be the same as for units using and vehicle parts. For this proposed
particulate matter in the emissions. Tier 4 in the general stationary fuel rule, we are defining the lead
Examples include ladle metallurgy combustion source category in proposed production source category to consist of
operations, desulfurization, hot metal 40 CFR part 98, subpart C. primary lead smelters and secondary
transfer, sinter coolers, and the charging lead smelters. A primary lead smelter
5. Selection of Data Reporting produces lead metal from lead sulfide
and tapping of furnaces. The Requirements
information we have examined to date ore concentrates through the use of
indicates that these emissions We are proposing that facilities pyrometallurgical processes. A
contribute very little to the overall GHG submit annual emission estimates for secondary lead smelter produces lead
emissions from the iron and steel sector CO2 presented by calendar quarters for and lead alloys from lead-bearing scrap
(probably on the order of one percent or coke oven battery combustion stacks, metal.
less). For example, emissions of blast coke pushing, blast furnace stoves, For the primary lead smelting process
taconite indurating furnaces, electric arc used in the U.S., lead sulfide ore
79 See Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission furnaces, argon-oxygen decarburization concentrate is first fed to a sintering
Factors, Fifth Edition: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ vessel, direct reduced iron furnaces, and process to burn sulfur from the lead ore.
chief/ap42/ch12/final/c12s02_may08.pdf. sinter plants. The sinter is smelted with a
carbonaceous reducing agent in a blast used at primary and secondary lead Combustion GHG emissions were 0.6
furnace to produce molten lead bullion. smelters when natural gas or another million metric tons CO2e emissions (69
From the furnace, the bullion is fuel is burned in the unit to produce percent of the total emissions). The
transferred to dross kettle furnaces to heat for drying, roasting, sintering, remaining 0.3 million metric tons CO2e
remove primarily copper and other calcining, melting, or casting operations. (31 percent of the total emissions) were
metal impurities. Following further Process-related CO2 emissions are process-related GHG emissions.
refining steps, the lead is cast into released from the lead smelting process Additional background information
ingots or alloy products. due to the addition of a carbonaceous about GHG emissions from the lead
The predominate feed materials reducing agent such as metallurgical production source category is available
processed at U.S. secondary lead coke or coal to the smelting furnace. The in the Lead Production TSD (EPA–HQ–
smelters are used automobile batteries, reduction of lead oxide to lead metal OAR–2008–0508–018).
but these smelters can also process other during the process produces the CO2
lead-bearing scrap materials including emissions. 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
wheel balance weights, pipe, solder,
drosses, and lead sheathing. These Currently there is one primary lead In developing the threshold for lead
incoming lead scrap materials are first smelter operating in the U.S. There are production facilities, we considered
pre-treated to partially remove metal 26 secondary lead smelters in the U.S. using annual GHG emissions-based
and nonmetal contaminants. The with widely varying annual lead threshold levels of 1,000 metric tons
resulting lead scrap is smelted (U.S. production capacities ranging from CO2e, 10,000 metric tons CO2e, 25,000
secondary lead smelters typically use approximately 1,000 metric tons to more metric tons CO2e and 100,000 metric
either a blast furnace or reverberatory than 100,000 metric tons. Total national tons CO2e. This threshold is based on
furnace). The molten lead from the GHG emissions from lead production in combined combustion and process CO2
smelting furnace is refined in kettle the U.S. were estimated to be emissions at the lead production
furnaces, and then cast into ingots or approximately 0.9 million metric tons facility. Table R–1 of this preamble
alloy products. CO2e in 2006. These emissions include presents the estimated emissions and
Lead production results in both both on-site stationary combustion number of facilities that would be
combustion and process-related GHG emissions (CO2, CH4, and N2O) and subject to GHG emissions reporting,
emissions. Combustion-related CO2, process-related emissions (CO2). The based on existing facility lead
CH4, and N2O emissions are generated majority of these emissions were from production capacities, under these
from metallurgical process equipment the combustion of carbon-based fuels. various threshold levels.
TABLE R–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR LEAD SMELTERS

Total Nationwide
Threshold level metric tons CO2e/yr nationwide number of metric tons Facility
emissions facilities Percent Percent
CO2e/yr number
1,000 ........................................................ 866,000 27 859,000 99 17 63

10,000 ...................................................... 866,000 27 853,000 98 16 59
25,000 ...................................................... 866,000 27 798,000 92 13 48
100,000 .................................................... 866,000 27 0 0 0 0
Secondary lead smelters in the U.S. threshold level being proposed for other facilities. A full summary of methods
vary greatly in production capacity and source categories with similar facility reviewed is available in the Lead
include 10 small facilities with size characteristics. More discussion of Production TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–
production capacities less than 4,000 the threshold selection analysis is 0508–018).
tons per year. Table R–1 of this available in the Lead Production TSD Option 1. Apply a default emission
preamble shows approximately 92 (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–018). For factor for the process-related emissions
percent of the GHG emissions that result specific information on costs, including to the facility’s lead production rate.
from lead production are released from unamortized first year capital This is a simplified emission calculation
the one primary smelter and 12 expenditures, please refer to section 4 of method using only default emission
secondary smelters that emit more than the RIA and the RIA cost appendix. factors to estimate process-related CO2
25,000 metric tons CO2e annually. Of emissions. The method requires
3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring multiplying the amount of lead
the facilities with annual GHG
Methods produced by the appropriate default
emissions below 25,000 metric tons
CO2e, 10 secondary smelters are We reviewed existing domestic and emission factors from the 2006 IPCC
estimated to emit less than 1,000 metric international GHG monitoring Guidelines. This method is consistent
tons CO2e annually. guidelines and protocols including the with the IPCC Tier 1 method.
To avoid placing a reporting burden 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Option 2. Perform monthly
on the smaller secondary lead smelters Greenhouse Gas Inventories, U.S. GHG measurements of the carbon content of
which may operate as small businesses Inventory, the EU Emissions Trading specific process inputs and measure the
while still requiring the reporting of System, the Canadian Mandatory mass rate of these inputs. This is the
GHG emissions from those facilities Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program, and IPCC Tier 3 approach and the higher
releasing most of the GHG emissions in the Australian National Greenhouse Gas order methods in the Canadian and
this source category, we are proposing a Reporting Program. These methods Australian reporting programs.
threshold of 25,000 metric tons CO2e coalesce around the following four Implementation of this method requires
per year for reporting of emissions. This options for estimating process-related owners and operators of affected lead
threshold level is consistent with the CO2 emissions from lead production smelters to determine the carbon
contents of materials added to the part 98, subpart C to estimate CO2 information to calculate the process-
smelting furnace by analysis of emissions. Also, refer to proposed 40 related CO2 emissions.
representative samples collected of the CFR part 98, subpart C to estimate We also decided not to propose
material or from information provided combustion-related CH4 and N2O. Option 3 because of the potential for
by the material suppliers. In addition, For facilities that do not currently significant variations at lead smelters in
you must measure and record the have CEMS that meet the requirements the characteristics and quantities of the
quantities of these input materials outlined in proposed 40 CFR part 98, furnace inputs (e.g., lead scrap
consumed during production. To obtain subpart C, or where CEMS would not materials, carbonaceous reducing
the process-related CO2 emission adequately account for combustion and agents) and process operating
estimate, the material carbon content process related CO2 emissions, the parameters. A method using periodic,
would be multiplied by the proposed monitoring method for short-term stack testing would not be
corresponding mass of the carbon- process-related CO2 from lead practical or appropriate for those lead
containing input material consumed production is Option 2. You would be smelters where the furnace inputs and
and a conversion factor of carbon to required to follow the calculation operating parameters do not remain
CO2. This method assumes that all of procedures, monitoring and QA/QC relatively consistent over the reporting
the carbon is converted to CO2 during methods, missing data procedures, period.
the reduction process. The facility reporting requirements, and Further details about the selection of
owner or operator would determine the recordkeeping requirements of proposed the monitoring methods for GHG
average carbon content of the material 40 CFR part 98, subpart C to estimate emissions is available in the Lead
for each calendar month using emissions of CO2, CH4 and N2O from Production TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–
information provided by the material stationary combustion. This section of 0508–018).
supplier or by collecting a composite the preamble provides procedures only 4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating
sample of material and sending it to an for calculating and reporting process- Missing Data
independent laboratory for chemical related emissions.
analysis. We propose Option 2, due to the For smelting furnaces for which the
Option 3. Use CO2 emissions data operating variations between the owner or operator calculates process
from a stack test performed using EPA individual U.S. lead production GHG emissions using site-specific
reference test methods to develop a site- facilities, including differences in carbonaceous input material data, the
specific process emissions factor which equipment configurations, mix of lead proposed rule requires the use of
is then applied to quantity measurement feedstocks charged, and types of carbon substitute data whenever a quality-
data of feed material or product for the materials used. Further, Option 2 would assured value of a parameter that is used
specified reporting period. This result in lower uncertainty as compared to calculate GHG emissions is
monitoring method is applicable to to applying a default emissions factor unavailable, or ‘‘missing.’’ If the carbon
furnace configurations for which the based approach to these units. content analysis of carbon inputs is
GHG emissions are contained within a Although we are not proposing to missing or lost the substitute data value
stack or vent. Using site-specific require you to directly measure process would be the average of the quality-
emissions factors based on short-term emissions, unless you meet the assured values of the parameter
stack testing is appropriate for those requirements of proposed 40 CFR part immediately before and immediately
facilities where process inputs (e.g., feed 98, subpart C and the CEMS account for after the missing data period. In those
materials, carbonaceous reducing both combustion and process-relate cases when an owner or operator uses
agents) and process operating emissions, you could opt to use direct direct measurement by a CO2 CEMS, the
parameters remain relatively consistent measurement of CO2 emissions as an missing data procedures would be the
over time. alternative GHG emissions estimation same as the Tier 4 requirements
Option 4. Use direct emission method because it would best reflect described for general stationary fuel
measurement of CO2 emissions. For actual operating practices at your combustion sources in proposed 40 CFR
furnace configurations in which the facility, and therefore, reduce part 98, subpart C. The likelihood for
process off-gases are contained within a uncertainty. While we recognize that the missing data is low, as businesses
stack or vent, direct measurement of the costs for conducting direct closely track their purchase of
CO2 emissions can be made by measurements may be higher than other production inputs.
continuously measuring the off-gas methods, we are proposing to include
this alternative because it provides GHG 5. Selection of Data Reporting
stream CO2 concentration and flow rate
emissions data that have low Requirements
using a CEMS. For a smelting furnace
used for lead production where both uncertainty. The additional cost burden The proposed rule would require
combustion and process-related may be acceptable to owners and annual reporting of the total annual CO2
emissions are released by a source (e.g. operators with site-specific reasons for process-related emissions from each
blast furnace) emissions reported by choosing this alternative. smelting furnace at lead production
using a CEMS would be total CO2 We decided not to propose the use of facilities, as well as any stationary fuel
emissions including both combustion the default CO2 emission factors (Option combustion emissions. In addition, we
and process-related CO2 emissions. 1) because their application is more are proposing that additional
Proposed Option. Under this appropriate for GHG estimates from information that forms the basis of the
proposed rule, if you are required to use aggregated process information on a emissions estimates also be reported so
an existing CEMS to meet the sector-wide or nationwide basis than for that we can understand and verify the
requirements outlined in proposed 40 determining GHG emissions from reported emissions. This addition
CFR part 98, subpart C, you would be specific facilities. We considered the information includes the total number
required to use CEMS to estimate CO2 additional burden of the material of smelting furnaces operated at the
emissions. Where the CEMS capture all measurements required for the carbon facility, the facility lead product
combustion- and process-related CO2 calculations under Option 2 small in production capacity, the annual facility
emissions you would be required to relation to the increased accuracy production quantity, annual quantity
follow requirements of proposed 40 CFR expected from using this site-specific and type of carbon-containing input
materials consumed or used, annual S. Lime Manufacturing million metric tons CO2e in 2004 (or
weighted average carbon contents by <0.4 percent of national emissions).
material type, and the number of facility These emissions include both process-
operating hours in the calendar year. A Lime is an important manufactured related emissions and on-site stationary
complete list of data to be reported is product with many industrial, chemical, combustion emissions from 89 lime
included in proposed 40 CFR part 98, and environmental applications. Its manufacturing facilities across the U.S.
subparts A and R. major uses are in steel making, flue gas
and Puerto Rico. Process-related
desulfurization systems at coal-fired
6. Selection of Records That Must Be emissions account for 14.3 million
electric power plants, construction, and
Retained water purification. Lime is used for the metric tons CO2e, or 56 percent of the
Maintaining records of the following purposes: Metallurgical uses total, while on-site stationary
information used to determine the (36 percent), environmental uses (29 combustion emissions account for the
reported GHG emissions is necessary to percent), chemical and industrial uses remaining 11.1 million metric tons
enable us to verify that the GHG (21 percent), construction uses (13 CO2e.
emissions monitoring and calculations percent), and to make dolomite For additional background
were done correctly. In addition to the refractories (1 percent). information on lime manufacturing,
information reported as described in For U.S. operations, the term ‘‘lime’’ please refer to the Lime Manufacturing
Section V.R.5 of this preamble, we actually refers to a variety of chemical TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–019).
propose that all facilities estimating compounds. These compounds include
emissions according to the carbon input calcium oxide (CaO), or high-calcium 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
method maintain records of each quicklime; calcium hydroxide
carbon-containing input material (Ca(OH)2), or hydrated lime; dolomitic In developing the proposed reporting
consumed or used (other than fuel) the quicklime ((CaO∑MgO)); and dolomitic threshold for the lime manufacturing
monthly material quantity, monthly hydrate ((Ca(OH)2∑MgO) or source category, we considered
average carbon content determined for (Ca(OH)2∑Mg(OH)2)). Lime emissions-based thresholds of 1,000
material, and records of the supplier manufacturing involves three main metric tons CO2e, 10,000 metric tons
provided information or analyses used processes: Stone preparation, CO2e, 25,000 metric tons CO2e and
for the determination. If you use the calcination, and hydration. During the 100,000 metric tons CO2e. This
CEMS procedure, you would maintain calcination process, the carbonate in threshold is based on combined
the CEMS measurement records limestone is sufficiently heated and combustion and process CO2 emissions
according to the procedures in proposed reduced to CO2 gas. In certain at a lime production facility. Table S–
40 CFR part 98, subpart C. These applications, lime reabsorbs CO2 during 1 of this preamble illustrates the
records would be required to be use thereby reducing onsite GHG emissions and facilities that would be
maintained onsite for 5 years. A emissions. covered under various thresholds.
complete list of records to be retained is National emissions from the lime
included in the proposed rule. industry were estimated to be 25.4
TABLE S–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR LIME MANUFACTURING

Threshold level metric tons CO2e/yr metric tons of facilities metric tons Percent Number Percent
CO2e/yr CO2e/yr
1,000 ........................................................ 25,421,043 89 25,421,043 100 89 100

10,000 ...................................................... 25,421,043 89 25,396,036 99.9 86 97
25,000 ...................................................... 25,421,043 89 25,371,254 99.8 85 96
100,000 .................................................... 25,421,043 89 23,833,273 94 52 58
The lime manufacturing sector For specific information on costs, production outputs of the lime
consists primarily of large facilities and including unamortized first year capital manufacturing process.
a few smaller facilities. All facilities, expenditures, please refer to section 4 of Input-based Options. We considered
except four, exceed the 25,000 metric the RIA and the RIA cost appendix. the IPCC Tier 3 method which requires
tons CO2e threshold. facilities to estimate process emissions
Consistent with National Lime 3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring by measuring the quantity of carbonate
Association recommendations, and in Methods inputs to the kiln(s) and applying the
order to simplify the proposed rule and Many domestic and international appropriate emission factors and
avoid the need to calculate and report GHG monitoring guidelines and calcination fractions to the carbonates
whether the threshold value has been protocols include methodologies for consumed. In order to assess the
exceeded, we are proposing that all lime estimating process-related emissions composition of carbonate inputs,
manufacturing facilities report GHG from lime manufacturing (e.g., the 2006 facilities would send samples of their
emissions. This captures 100 percent of IPCC Guidelines, U.S. Inventory, DOE inputs and lime kiln dust produced to
emissions without significantly 1605(b), National Lime Association CO2 an off-site laboratory for analysis on a
increasing the number of facilities that Protocol, and the EU Emissions Trading monthly basis using ASTM C25–06,
would have reported at 1,000, 10,000, or System). These methodologies can be ‘‘Standard Test Methods for Chemical
25,000 metric ton thresholds. For a full summarized by the following two Analysis of Limestone, Quicklime, and
discussion of the threshold analysis, overall approaches to estimating Hydrated Lime’’ (incorporated by
please refer to the Lime Manufacturing emissions, based on measuring either reference, see proposed 40 CFR 98.7).
TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–019). the carbonate inputs to the kiln or For greater accuracy, facilities would
also estimate the calcination fraction of dust correction factor for the Tier 1 and 4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating
each carbonate consumed on a monthly Tier 2 production-based approaches is Missing Data
basis. However, it is generally accepted 15 percent. However, IPCC states that It is assumed that a facility would be
that the calcination fraction of the major source of uncertainty in the able to supply facility-specific
carbonates during lime production is above approaches is the CaO content of production data. Since the likelihood
100 percent or very close to it. the lime produced. for missing data is low because
Output-based Options. We also Proposed Option. Under this businesses closely track production, 100
considered three output-based methods proposed rule, if you are using an
percent data availability is required for
for quantifying process-related existing CEMS that meets the
lime production (by type) in the
emissions based on the quantity of lime requirements outlined in proposed 40
proposed rule. If analysis for the CaO
produced. IPCC’s Tier 1 method applies CFR part 98, subpart C, you would be
and MgO content of the lime product
default emission factors to each of the required to use CEMS to estimate CO2
are unavailable or ‘‘missing’’, facility
three types of lime produced (high emissions. Where the CEMS capture all
owners or operators would substitute a
calcium lime, dolomitic lime, or combustion- and process-related CO2
data value that is the average of the
hydraulic lime). The IPCC Tier 2 emissions you would be required to
quality-assured values of the parameter
method applies a default emissions follow the requirements of proposed 40
immediately before and immediately
factor based on lime type to the CFR part 98, subpart C to estimate both
corresponding quantity of all lime combustion and process CO2 emissions. after the missing data period.
produced (by type), correcting for the Also, you would refer to proposed 40 5. Selection of Data Reporting
amount of calcined byproduct/waste CFR part 98, subpart C to estimate Requirements
product (such as lime kiln dust) combustion-related CH4 and N2O We propose that in addition to
produced in the process. emissions. stationary fuel combustion GHG
The third output method, developed Under this proposed rule, if you do
emissions, you report annual CO2
by the National Lime Association, not have CEMS that meet the conditions
emissions for each kiln. In addition, for
improves upon the IPCC Tier 2 outlined in proposed 40 CFR part 98,
each kiln we are proposing that facilities
procedure. In this method, facilities subpart C, you would use the National
report the following data used as the
multiply the amount of lime produced Lime Association method in this section
basis of the calculations to assist in
at each kiln and the amount of calcined of the preamble to calculate process-
verification of estimates, checks for
byproducts/wastes at the kiln by an related CO2 emissions. Refer to
reasonableness, and other data quality
emission factor. The emission factor is proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C
derived based on facility specific specifically for procedures to estimate considerations for process emissions:
chemical analysis of the CaO and combustion-related CO2, CH4 and N2O Annual lime production and production
magnesium oxide (MgO) content of the emissions. capacity, emission factor by lime type,
lime produced at the kiln. To assess the We are proposing the National Lime and number of operating hours in the
composition of the lime and calcined Association’s output-based procedure calendar year. A full list of data to be
byproduct/waste product, facilities because this method is already in use by reported is included in proposed 40
would send samples to an off-site U.S. facilities and the improvement in CFR part 98, subparts A and S.
laboratory for analysis on a monthly accuracy compared to default 6. Selection of Records That Must be
basis following the procedures approaches can be achieved at minimal Retained
described in the National Lime additional cost. The measurement of
Maintaining records of the
Association’s method protocol, along production quantities is common
information used to determine the
with the procedures in ASTM C25–06, practice in the industry and is usually
reported GHG emissions are necessary
‘‘Standard Test Methods for Chemical measured through the use of scales or
weigh belts so additional costs to the to enable us to verify that the GHG
Analysis of Limestone, Quicklime, and
industry are not anticipated. The emissions monitoring and calculations
Hydrated Lime’’ (incorporated by
primary additional burden for facilities were done correctly. In addition to the
reference, see proposed 40 CFR 98.7).
would include conducting a CaO and data to be reported, we are proposing
This third output approach is also
MgO analysis of each lime product on that the facilities maintain records of the
consistent with 1605(b)’s ‘‘A’’ rated
a monthly basis (to be averaged on an calculation of emission factors, results
approach and EU Emission Trading
annual basis). However, approximately of the monthly chemical composition
System’s calculation B method.
We compared the various methods for two thirds of the lime manufacturing analyses, total lime production for each
estimating process-related CO2 facilities in the U.S. are already kiln by month and type, total annual
emissions. In general, the IPCC output undertaking sampling efforts to meet calcined byproducts/wastes produced
methods are less certain, as they involve reporting goals set forth by the National by each kiln averaged from monthly
multiplying production data by Lime Association. data, and correction factor for
emission and correction factors for lime We request comment on the byproducts/waste products for each
kiln dust that are likely default values advantages and disadvantages of the kiln. A full list of records that must be
based on purity assumptions (i.e. the IPCC Tier 3 method and supporting retained onsite is included in proposed
total CaO and MgO content of the lime documentation. After consideration of 40 CFR part 98, subparts A and S.
products). In contrast, the input method public comments, we may promulgate T. Magnesium Production
is more certain as it involves measuring the IPCC Tier 3 input-based procedure,
the consumption of each carbonate the National Lime Association output- 1. Definition of the Source Category
input and calculating purity fractions. based procedure, or a combination Magnesium is a high-strength and
According to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines, based on additional information that is light-weight metal that is important for
the uncertainty involved in the provided. the manufacture of a wide range of
carbonate input approach for the IPCC The various approaches to monitoring products and materials, such as portable
Tier 3 method is 1 to 3 percent and the GHG emissions are elaborated in the electronics, automobiles, and other
uncertainty involved in using the Lime Manufacturing TSD (EPA–HQ– machinery. The U.S. accounts for less
default emission factor and lime kiln OAR–2008–0508–019). than 10 percent of world primary
magnesium production but is a Cover gas systems are typically used facilities accounted for about 64 percent
significant importer of magnesium and to protect the surface of a crucible of of total emissions, or 2 metric tons
producer of cast parts. The production molten magnesium that is the source for CO2e. Approximately 20 magnesium die
and processing of magnesium metal a casting operation and to protect the casting facilities in the U.S. accounted
under common practice results in casting operation itself (e.g., ingot for more than 30 percent, or more than
emissions of SF6. For further casting). SF6 has been used in this 0.9 metric tons CO2e of total
information, see the Magnesium application in most parts of the world magnesium-related SF6 emissions. Other
Production TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– for the last twenty years. Due to smaller casting activities such as sand
0508–020). increasing awareness of the GWP of SF6, and permanent mold casting accounted
The magnesium metal production the magnesium industry has begun for the remaining magnesium-related
(primary and secondary) and casting exploring climate-friendly alternative emissions of SF6. The term ‘‘metal
industry typically uses SF6 as a cover melt protection technologies. At this processed’’ used here is defined as the
gas to prevent the rapid oxidation and time the leading alternatives include mass of magnesium melted to cast or
burning of molten magnesium in the HFC–134a, a fluorinated ketone (FK 5– create parts. This should not be
presence of air. A dilute gaseous 1–12, C3F7C(O)C2F5), and dilute sulfur confused with the mass of finished
mixture of SF6 with dry air and/or CO2 dioxide (SO2). The application of the magnesium parts because varying
is blown over molten magnesium metal fluorinated alternatives mentioned here amounts of the metal may be lost as
to induce and stabilize the formation of may generate byproduct emissions of
scrap when performing casting
a protective crust. A small portion of the concern including PFCs. We are
SF6 reacts with the magnesium to form operations.
proposing that magnesium production
a thin molecular film of mostly and processing facilities report process 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
magnesium oxide and magnesium emissions of SF6, HFC–134a, FK 5–1–
fluoride. The amount of SF6 reacting in 12, and CO2. We considered emissions thresholds
magnesium production and processing Total U.S. emissions of SF6 from of 1,000 metric tons CO2e, 10,000 metric
is under study but is presently assumed magnesium production and processing tons CO2e, 25,000 metric tons CO2e, and
to be negligible. Thus, all SF6 used is in the U.S. were estimated to be 3.2 100,000 metric tons CO2e as well as
presently assumed to be emitted into the metric tons CO2e in 2006. Primary and capacity based thresholds as shown in
atmosphere. secondary production activities at 3 Tables T–1 and T–2 of this preamble.
TABLE T–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR MG PRODUCTION BASED ON EMISSIONS

nationwide Nationwide
Threshold level metric tons CO2e/yr emissions number of Metric tons
metric tons facilities Percent Facilities Percent
CO2e/yr
CO2e/Yr
1,000 ........................................................ 3,200,000 13 2,954,559 92 13 100

10,000 ...................................................... 3,200,000 13 2,939,741 92 11 85
25,000 ...................................................... 3,200,000 13 2,939,741 92 11 85
100,000 .................................................... 3,200,000 13 2,872,982 90 9 69
We believe that there are additional facilities than the 13 listed above, however, we do not have sufficient information to estimate emissions or
production levels.
TABLE T–2. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR MG PRODUCTION BASED ON MG PRODUCTION CAPACITY

Total Emissions covered Facilities Covered
nationwide Number of
Capacity threshold level Mg/yr emissions facilities Metric tons
metric tons CO2e/yr Percent Facilities Percent
CO2e/Yr
26 ............................................................. 3,200,000 13 2,954,559 92 13 100

262 ........................................................... 3,200,000 13 2,949,732 92 12 92
656 ........................................................... 3,200,000 13 2,949,732 92 12 92
2,622 ........................................................ 3,200,000 13 2,780,717 87 9 69
We believe that there are additional facilities than the 13 listed above, however, we do not have sufficient information to estimate emissions or
production levels.
Under the proposed rule, magnesium The proposed emissions threshold of We also considered capacity-based
metal production and parts casting 25,000 metric tons CO2e is equal to thresholds of 26, 262, 656, and 2,622
facilities would have to report their total emissions of 1,046 kg of SF6; 19,231 kg metric tons, based on 100 percent
GHG emissions if those emissions of HFC–134a; or 25,000,000 kg of CO2 or capacity utilization and an SF6 emission
exceeded 25,000 metric tons CO2e. This FK 5–1–2. Other emission threshold rate of 1.6 kg SF6 per metric ton of
threshold covers all currently identified options that we considered were 1,000 magnesium produced or processed. This
operating U.S. primary and secondary metric tons CO2e, 10,000 metric tons emission factor represents the sum of (1)
magnesium producers and most die CO2e, and 100,000 metric tons CO2e. the average of the emission factors
casters, accounting for over 99 percent The 10,000 metric tons CO2e emission reported for secondary production and
of emissions from these source threshold yielded results identical to die casting through our magnesium
categories. those of the proposed option. Partnership (excluding outliers), and (2)
the standard deviation of those emission consumption factors per unit Mg facilities would weigh all gas cylinders
factors. The 1.6 kg-per-ton factor is produced or processed, to a Tier 3 that are returned to the gas supplier, or
higher than most, though not all, of the approach based on facility-specific have the gas supplier weigh the
emission factors reported, which ranged measured emissions data. cylinders, to determine the residual gas
from 0.7 to 7 kg/ton Mg in 2006. The Under this proposed rule, if you are still in the cylinder. The weight of
resulting capacity thresholds yielded required to use an existing CEMS to residual gas would be subtracted from
results very similar to those of the meet the requirements outlined in the weight of gas delivered to determine
emission-based thresholds. proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C, you gas consumption. Gas suppliers can
The emissions based threshold was would be required to use CEMS to provide detailed monthly spreadsheets
selected over the capacity based estimate CO2 emissions. Where the with exact residual gas amounts
threshold for several reasons. The CEMS capture all combustion- and returned.
emissions based threshold is simple to process-related CO2 emissions you Facilities would be required to follow
evaluate because magnesium production would be required to follow the several procedures to ensure the quality
and processing facilities can use readily calculation procedures, monitoring and of the consumption data. These
available data regarding consumption of QA/QC methods, missing data procedures could be readily adopted, or
SF6 and would also possess similar data procedures, reporting requirements, and would be based on information that is
for alternatives such as HFC–134a as recordkeeping requirements of proposed already collected for other reasons.
these are phased-in over time. To 40 CFR part 98, subpart C to estimate Facilities would be required to track
determine whether they exceeded the CO2 emissions. Also, refer to proposed specific cylinders leaving and entering
thresholds, magnesium facilities would 40 CFR part 98, subpart C to estimate storage with check-out and weigh-in
multiply the total consumption of each combustion-related CH4 and N2O sheets and procedures. Scales used for
of these gases by a GWP-unit conversion emissions. weighing cylinders and mass flow
factor that could be compared to the For facilities that do not currently meters would need to be accurate to
25,000 metric ton threshold. The have CEMS that meet the requirements within 1 percent of true mass, and
equation for this calculation is provided outlined in proposed 40 CFR part 98, would be periodically calibrated.
in the proposed regulatory text. subpart C, or where the CEMS would Facilities would calculate the facility
The emissions-based threshold of not adequately account for process usage rate, compare it to known default
25,000 metric tons CO2e also takes into emissions, you would be required to emission rates and historical data for the
account the variability in cover gas follow the proposed monitoring method facility, and investigate any anomalies
identities, usage rates, and process discussed below. The proposed method in the facility usage rate. Finally,
conditions. Alternatives to SF6 have outlined below accounts for process- facilities would need to have procedures
considerably lower GWPs than SF6. In related SF6, HFC–134a, FK 5–1–12, and to ensure that all production lines have
facilities where SF6 is used, the usage CO2 emissions. Refer to proposed 40 provided information to the manager
rate can vary by an order of magnitude CFR part 98, subpart C specifically for compiling the emissions report, if this is
depending on the casting process and procedures to estimate combustion- not already handled through an
operating conditions. Therefore, cover related CO2, CH4 and N2O emissions. electronic inventory system.
gas emissions are not well predicted by The proposed method for monitoring We are not proposing IPCC’s Tier 1 or
production capacity. Because emissions SF6, HFC–134a, FK 5–1–12, and CO2 3 methodologies for calculating
of each cover gas are assumed to equal cover gas emissions from magnesium emissions. Although the Tier 1
use, and facilities are expected to track production and processing is similar to methodology is straightforward, the
gas use in the ordinary course of the Tier 2 approach in the 2006 IPCC default consumption factor for the SF6
business, facilities should have little Guidelines for magnesium production. usage rate is significantly uncertain due
difficulty determining whether or not This approach is based on facility- to the variability in production
they must report under this rule. For a specific information on cover gas processes and operating conditions. The
full discussion of the threshold analysis, consumption and assumes that all gases Tier 3 methodology of conducting
please refer to the Magnesium consumed are emitted. This facility-specific measurements of
Production TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– methodology applies to any cover gas emissions to account for potential cover
0508–020). For specific information on that is a GHG, including SF6, CO2, HFC– gas destruction and byproduct
costs, including unamortized first year 134a and FK 5–1–12. formation is the most accurate, but also
capital expenditures, please refer to We propose three options for poses significant economic challenges
section 4 of the RIA and the RIA cost measuring gas consumption: for implementation because of the cost
appendix. 1. Weighing gas cylinders as they are of direct emission measurements.
brought into and out of service allowing
3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring 4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating
a facility to accurately track the actual
Methods Missing Data
mass of gas used.
We reviewed a wide range of 2. Using a mass flow meter to In general, it is unlikely that cover gas
protocols and guidance in developing continuously measure the mass of global consumption data would be missing.
this proposal, including the 2006 IPCC warming gases used. Facilities are expected to know the
Guidelines, EPA’s SF6 Emission 3. Performing a facility level mass quantities of cover gas that they
Reduction Partnership for the balance for all global warming gases consume because facility operations rely
Magnesium Industry, the U.S. GHG used at least once annually. Using this on accurate monitoring and tracking of
Inventory, DOE 1605(b), EPA’s Climate approach, a facility would review its gas costs. Facilities would possess invoices
Leaders Program, and TCR. purchase records and inventory to from gas suppliers during a given year
The methods described in these determine actual mass of gas used and and many facilities currently track the
protocols and guidance were similar to subtract a 10 percent default heel factor weight of SF6 consumed by weighing
the methods described by the IPCC to account for residual gas in cylinders individual cylinders prior to
Guidelines and the U.S. GHG Inventory returned to the gas suppliers. replacement.
methodology. These methods range When weighing cylinders to However, where cover gas
from a Tier 1 approach, based on default determine cover gas consumption, consumption information is missing, we
propose that facilities estimate These records are being specified released from the calcination of
emissions by multiplying production by because they are the values that are used carbonates.
the average cover gas usage rate (kg gas to calculate the GHG emissions that are For additional background
per ton of magnesium produced or reported. They are necessary to verify information on the use of limestone,
processed) from the most recent period that the GHG emissions monitoring and dolomite and other carbonates, please
when operating conditions were similar calculations were done correctly and refer to the Miscellaneous Uses of
to those for the period for which the accurately. Carbonates TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–
data are missing, i.e., using the same 0508–021).
cover gas concentrations and flow rates U. Miscellaneous Uses of Carbonates
and, if applicable, casting parts of a 1. Definition of the Source Category
similar size. A separate threshold analysis is not
Limestone (CaCO3), dolomite proposed for uses of limestone,
5. Selection of Data Reporting (CaMg(CO3)2) and other carbonates are dolomite and other carbonates as these
Requirements inputs used in a number of industries. emissions occur in a large number of
Facilities would be required to report The most common applications of facilities across a range of industries.
total facility GHG emissions and limestone are used as a construction We propose that facilities with source
emissions by process type: Primary aggregate (78 percent of specified categories identified in proposed 40
production, secondary production, die national consumption in 2006), the CFR 98.2(a)(1) or (a)(2) consuming
casting, or other type of casting. For chemical and metallurgy industries (18 limestone, dolomite and other
total facility and process emissions, percent), and other specialized carbonates calculate the relevant
emissions would be reported in metric applications (three percent). The emissions from their facility, including
tons of SF6, HFC–134a, FK 5–1–12, and breakdown of reported specified emissions from calcination of
CO2 (used as a carrier gas). dolomite national consumption was carbonates, to determine whether they
Along with their total emissions from similar to that of limestone, with the surpass the proposed threshold for that
cover gas use, facilities would be majority being used as a construction industry. Data were not available to
required to submit supplemental data aggregate, and a lesser but still quantify emissions from the calcination
(as well as the supplemental data significant percent used in chemical and of carbonates across all industries;
required in the combustion and metallurgical applications. therefore, these emissions were
calcination sections) including the type For some of these applications, the considered where appropriate in the
of production processes (e.g., primary, carbonates undergo a calcination thresholds analysis for the respective
secondary, die casting), mass of process in which the carbonate is industries.
magnesium produced or processed in sufficiently heated, generating CO2 as a 3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring
metric tons for each process type, cover by-product. Examples of such emissive Methods
gas flow rate and composition, and mass applications include limestone used as
of any CO2 used as a carrier gas during Many domestic and international
a flux or purifier in metallurgical
reporting period. GHG monitoring guidelines and
furnaces, as a sorbent in flue gas
If data were missing, facilities would protocols include methodologies for
desulfurization systems for utility and
be required to report the length of time estimating process-related emissions
industrial plants, and as a raw material
the data were missing, the method used from the use of limestone, dolomite and
in the production of mineral wool or
to estimate emissions in their absence, other carbonates (e.g., the 2006 IPCC
magnesium. Non-emissive applications
and the quantity of emissions thereby Guidelines, U.S. Inventory, DOE
include limestone used in producing
estimated. Facilities would also submit 1605(b), the EU Emissions Trading
poultry grit and asphalt filler.
an explanation for any significant System, and the Australian National
The use of limestone, dolomite and Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program).
change in emission rate. Examples
other carbonates is purely an industrial These methodologies all rely on
could include installation of new melt
process source of emissions. Emissions measuring the consumption of
protection technology that would
from the use of carbonates in the carbonate inputs, but differ in their use
account for reduced emissions in any
manufacture of cement, ferroalloys, of default values. The range of default
given year, or occurrence or repair of
glass, iron and steel, lead, lime, pulp values reflect differing assumptions of
leaks in the cover gas delivery system.
These non-emissions data need to be and paper, and zinc are elaborated in the carbonate weight fraction in process
reported because they are needed to proposed 40 CFR part 98, subparts H, K, inputs; for example, the 2006 IPCC
understand the nature of the facilities N, Q, R, S, AA and GG, since they are Guidelines Tier 1 and 2 assume that
for which data are being reported and relatively significant emitters. Facilities carbonate inputs are 95 percent pure
for verifying the reasonableness of the that include only these source categories (i.e., 95 percent of the mass consumed
reported data. would not need to follow the methods is carbonate), whereas the Australian
presented in this section to estimate Program assumes a default purity of 90
6. Selection of Records That Must Be emissions from the miscellaneous use of percent for limestone, 95 percent for
Retained carbonates. The methods presented in dolomite, and 100 percent for
We are proposing that magnesium this section should be used by facilities magnesium carbonate.
producers and processors be required to that use carbonates in source categories We propose that facilities estimate
keep records documenting adherence to other than those listed above, but which process emissions by measuring the
the QA/QC requirements specified in are covered by the proposed rule. type and quantity of carbonate input to
the proposed rule. These records would As estimated in the U.S. GHG a kiln or furnace and applying the
include: Check-out and weigh-in sheets Inventory, national process emissions appropriate emissions factors for the
and procedures for cylinders; accuracy from other limestone and dolomite uses carbonates consumed. In order to assess
certifications and calibration records for (i.e., excluding cement, lime, and glass the composition of the carbonate input,
scales; residual gas amounts in manufacturing) were 7.9 million metric we propose that facilities send samples
cylinders sent back to suppliers; and tons CO2e in 2006 (0.1 percent of U.S. of each carbonate consumed to an off-
invoices for gas purchases and sales. emissions). CH4 and N2O are not site laboratory for a chemical analysis of
the carbonate weight fraction on an analysis on the fraction calcination of (NH3) through nitric oxide (NO) to
annual basis. Emission factors are based carbonates consumed were lost or nitrogen dioxide (NO2) at high
on stoichiometry and are presented in missing, the analysis would have to be temperatures. Then the NO2 is absorbed
Table U–1 of this preamble. You would repeated. It is assumed that a facility in and reacted with water (H2O) to form
also be required to determine the would be able to supply facility-specific nitric acid (HNO3).
calcination fraction for each of the carbonate consumption data. The According to a facility-level inventory
carbonate-based minerals consumed, likelihood for missing data is low, as for 2006, there are 45 nitric acid
using an appropriate test method. The businesses closely track production production facilities operating in 25
calcination fraction is the fraction of inputs. States with a total of 65 process lines.
carbonate that is volatilized in the These facilities represent the best
process. A calcination fraction of 1.0 5. Selection of Data Reporting
available data at the time of this
could over estimate CO2 emissions. You Requirements
rulemaking. Using the facility-level
would refer to proposed 40 CFR part 98, We propose that facilities report inventory, production levels for 2006
subpart C specifically for procedures to annual CO2 emissions from carbonate have been estimated at 6.6 million
estimate combustion-related CO2, CH4 consumption. In addition, we are metric tons of nitric acid and indicate
and N2O emissions. proposing that facilities submit the an estimated 17.7 million metric tons
following data which are the basis of the CO2e of process-related emissions (this
TABLE U–1. CO2 EMISSION FACTORS emission calculation and are needed for represents the CO2 equivalent of N2O
FOR COMMON CARBONATES us to understand the emissions data and emissions, which is the primary
assess the reasonableness of the process-related GHG). Nitric Acid
CO2 emission reported emissions: annual carbonate process emissions were estimated in the
factor consumption (in metric tons, by U.S. GHG Inventory at 15.4 million
(metric tons carbonate) and the total fraction of
Mineral name—carbonate metric tons CO2e in 2006 or 0.2 percent
ons CO2/met-
ric tons on calcination achieved (for each of total U.S. GHG emissions. The main
carbonate) carbonate). A full list of data to be reason for the difference in estimates is
reported is included in proposed 40 that the methodology of the U.S.
Limestone—CaCO3 .............. 0.43971 CFR part 98, subparts A and U.
Magnesite—MgCO3 .............. 0.52197
Inventory assumed 20 percent of the
Dolomite—CaMg(CO3)2 ........ 6. Selection of Records That Must Be
0.47732 nitric acid facilities were using
Siderite—FeCO3 ................... Retained 0.37987 nonselective catalytic reduction as an
Ankerite— N2O abatement technology. The facility-
Ca(Fe,Mg,Mn)(CO3)2 ........ * 0.44197 We propose that facilities retain level analysis showed that only five
Rhodochrosite—MnCO3 ....... 0.38286 records on monthly carbonate percent of the nitric acid facilities are
Sodium Carbonate/Soda consumption (by type), annual records using nonselective catalytic reduction.
Ash—Na2CO3 .................... 0.41492 on the fraction of calcination achieved Stationary combustion emissions
(by carbonate type), and results of the were not estimated at the source
* This is an average of the range provided
by the 2006 IPCC Guidelines. annual chemical analysis. These records category level in the U.S. GHG
provide values that are directly used to Inventory. Stationary combustion
We also considered but decided not to calculate the emissions that are reported
propose simplified methods (similar to emissions at nitric acid facilities may be
and are necessary to allow associated with other chemical
IPCC Tier 1 and 2) for quantifying determination of whether the GHG
process-related emissions from this production processes as well (such as
emissions monitoring and calculations adipic acid production, phosphoric acid
source, which assumes that limestone were done correctly. A full list of
and dolomite are the only carbonates production, or ammonia
records that must be retained onsite is manufacturing).
consumed, and allow for the use of included in proposed 40 CFR part 98,
default fractions of the two carbonates For additional background
subparts A and U. information on nitric acid production,
(85 percent for limestone and 15 percent
for dolomite). Default factors do not V. Nitric Acid Production please refer to the Nitric Acid
account for variability in relative Production TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–
1. Definition of the Source Category 0508–022).
carbonate consumption by other sources
and therefore inaccurately estimate Nitric acid is an inorganic chemical
that is used in the manufacture of 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
emissions.
The various approaches to monitoring nitrogen-based fertilizers, adipic acid, In developing the proposed threshold
GHG emissions are elaborated in the and explosives. Nitric acid is also used for nitric acid production, we
Miscellaneous Uses of Carbonates TSD for metal etching and processing of considered emissions-based thresholds
(EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–021). ferrous metals. A nitric acid production of 1,000 metric tons CO2e, 10,000 metric
facility uses oxidation, condensation, tons CO2e, 25,000 metric tons CO2e and
4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating and absorption to produce a weak nitric 100,000 metric tons CO2e. Table V–1 of
Missing Data acid (30 to 70 percent in strength). The this preamble illustrates the emissions
We propose that 100 percent data production process begins with the and facilities that would be covered
availability is required. If chemical stepwise catalytic oxidation of ammonia under these various thresholds.
TABLE V–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR NITRIC ACID PRODUCTION

Process N2O emissions covered Facilities
N2O emission threshold (metric tons CO2e/yr) covered
(metric tons CO2e)
Number Percent Number Percent
1,000 .............................................................................................................. 17,731,650 100 45 100

10,000 ............................................................................................................ 17,723,576 99.9 44 97.8
TABLE V–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR NITRIC ACID PRODUCTION—Continued

Process N2O emissions covered Facilities
N2O emission threshold (metric tons CO2e/yr) covered
(metric tons CO2e)
Number Percent Number Percent
25,000 ............................................................................................................ 17,706,259 99.9 43 95.6

100,000 .......................................................................................................... 17,511,444 98.8 40 88.9
We are proposing all nitric acid available in the 2006 IPCC Guidelines, from the production rate measured
facilities report in order to simplify the based on technology type. It also during the most recent performance test.
rule and avoid the need for each facility assumes no abatement of N2O Option 5. Follow the Tier 3 approach
to calculate and report whether it emissions. established by IPCC using continuous
exceeds the threshold value. Facility- Option 2. Apply default emission monitoring. Use CEMS to directly
level emissions estimates based on plant factors on a site-specific basis using the measure N2O concentration and flow
production suggests that all known Tier 2 approach established by the IPCC. rate to directly determine N2O
facilities, except two, exceed the 25,000 This approach is also consistent with emissions. CEMS that measure N2O
metric tons CO2e threshold. When the DOE 1605(b) ‘‘B’’ rated approach. emissions directly are available, but the
facility-level production data were not These emission factors are dependent nitric acid industry is currently using
known, capacity data were used along on the type of nitric acid process used, only NOX CEMS.
with a utilization factor of 70 percent. the type of abatement technology used, Proposed Option. We are proposing
The utilization factor is based on total and the production activity. The Option 3 to quantify N2O process
2006 nitric acid production from the process-related N2O emissions are then emissions from all nitric acid facilities.
U.S. Census Bureau and capacity estimated by multiplying the emission You would be required to follow the
estimates from publicly available factor by the production level of nitric requirements in proposed 40 CFR part
sources. acid (on a 100 percent acid basis). 98, subpart C to estimate emissions of
This analysis, however, only took into CO2, CH4 and N2O from stationary
account process-related emissions, as Option 3. Follow the Tier 3 approach combustion. We identified Options 3, 4,
combustion-related emissions were not established by IPCC using periodic and 5 as the approaches providing the
available. Had combustion-related direct monitoring of N2O emissions to highest certainty and the best site-
emissions been included, it is probable determine the relationship between specific estimates. These three options
that additional facilities would have nitric acid production and the amount span the range of types of
been covered at each threshold. An ‘‘all of N2O emissions; i.e., develop a site- methodologies currently used that do
in’’ threshold captures 100 percent of specific emissions factor. The site- not apply default values. These options
emissions without significantly specific emission factor would be all use site-specific approaches that
increasing the number of facilities determined from an annual would provide insight into different
required to report. Finally, the cost of measurement or a single annual stack levels of emissions caused by site-
reporting using the proposed monitoring test. The site-specific emissions factor specific differences in process operation
method does not vary significantly developed from this test and production and abatement technologies. Option 3
between the four different emissions rate (activity level) is used to calculate requires an annual test of N2O emissions
based thresholds. N2O emissions. After the initial test, and the establishment of a site-specific
For a full discussion of the threshold annual testing of N2O emissions would emissions factor that relates N2O
analysis, please refer to the Nitric Acid be required each year to estimate the emissions with the nitric acid
Production TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– emission factor and applied to production rate.
0508–022). For specific information on production to estimate emissions. The Options 4 and 5 are similar in that
costs, including unamortized first year yearly testing would assist in verifying both use continuous monitoring to
capital expenditures, please refer to the emission factor. Testing would also calculate N2O emissions. Option 5
section 4 of the RIA and the RIA cost be required whenever the production directly measures the N2O emissions.
appendix. rate is changed by more than 10 percent Option 4 uses continuous measurement
from the production rate measured of NOX emissions to estimate a site-
3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring during the most recent performance test. specific emission factor that relates NOX
Methods Option 4. Follow the approach used emissions to N2O emissions. The
Many domestic and international by the Nitric Acid NSPS (40 CFR part emission factor is then used to estimate
GHG monitoring guidelines and 60, subpart G). This option would N2O emissions based on continuous
protocols include methodologies for require monitoring NOX emissions on a readings of NOX emissions.
estimating these emissions (e.g. 2006 continuous basis and measuring N2O Option 5 would provide the highest
IPCC Guidelines, U.S. GHG Inventory, emissions to establish a site-specific certainty of the three options and
DOE 1605(b), TCR, and EPA NSPS). emission factor that relates NOX capture the smallest changes in N2O
These methodologies coalesce around emissions to N2O emissions. The emissions over time, but N2O CEMS are
the five options discussed below. emission factor would then be used to not currently in use in the industry and
Option 1. Apply default emission estimate N2O emissions based on there is no existing EPA method for
factors to total facility production of continuous reading of NOX emissions. certifying N2O CEMS. Option 3 and
nitric acid using the Tier 1 approach Periodic measurement would also be Option 4 use site-specific emission
established by the IPCC. The emissions required to verify the emission factor factors so the margin of error is much
are calculated using the total production over time. Testing would also be lower than using default emission
of nitric acid and the highest required whenever the production rate factors. Option 4 would require the use
international default emission factor is changed by more than 10 percent of NOX CEMS that are already in use by
many nitric acid facilities to submit the following data to understand prime movers such as compressors are
automatically capture and record any the emissions data and verify the covered under Section V.C of this
changes in NOX emissions over time. reasonableness of the reported preamble.
However, NOX CEMS only capture emissions. The data should include The natural gas segment involves
emissions of NO and NO2 and not N2O. annual nitric acid production capacity, production, processing, transmission
Therefore they would not be useful in annual nitric acid production, type of and storage, and distribution of natural
the estimation of N2O emissions from nitric acid production process used, gas. The U.S. also receives, stores, and
nitric acid production facilities. number of operating hours in the processes imported liquefied natural gas
Although the amount of NOX and N2O calendar year, the emission rate factor (LNG) at LNG import terminals. The
emissions from nitric acid production used, abatement technology used (if petroleum segment involves crude oil
may be directly related, direct applicable), abatement technology production, transportation and refining.
measurement of NOX does not efficiency, and abatement utilization
automatically correlate to the amount of factor. The relevant facilities covered in this
N2O in the same exhaust stream. Capacity, actual production, and section are offshore petroleum and
Periodic testing of N2O emissions operating hours would be helpful in natural gas production facilities,
(Option 3) would not indicate changes determining the potential for growth in onshore natural gas processing facilities
in emissions over short periods of time, the nitric acid industry. The production (including gathering/boosting stations),
but does offer direct measurement of the rate can be determined through sales onshore natural gas transmission
GHG. records or by direct measurement using compression facilities, onshore natural
We request comment, along with flow meters or weigh scales. This gas storage facilities, LNG storage
supporting documentation, on the industry generally measures the facilities, and LNG import facilities.
advantages and disadvantages of using production rate as part of normal Fugitive emissions from petroleum
Options 3, 4 and 5. After consideration operating procedures. refineries are proposed for inclusion in
of public comments, EPA may A list of abatement technologies the rulemaking, but these emissions are
promulgate one or more of these options would be helpful in assessing how addressed in the petroleum refinery
or a combination based on the widespread the use of abatement is in section (Section V.Y) of this preamble.
additional information that is provided. the nitric acid source category, Under this section of the preamble, we
We decided not to propose Options 1 cataloging any new technologies that are seek comment on methods for reporting
and 2 because the use of default values being used, and documenting the fugitive emissions data from: On-shore
and lack of direct measurements results amount of time that the abatement petroleum and natural gas production
in a high level of uncertainty. Although technologies are being used. and natural gas distribution facilities.
different default emissions factors have A full list of data to be reported is For this rulemaking, fugitive
been developed for different processes included in proposed 40 CFR part 98, emissions from the petroleum and
(e.g., low pressure, high pressure) and subparts A and V. natural gas industry are defined as
abatement techniques, the use of these
6. Selection of Records That Must Be unintentional equipment emissions and
default values is more appropriate for
Retained intentional or designed releases of CH4-
sector wide or national total estimates
and/or CO2-containing natural gas or
than for determining emissions from a We propose that facilities maintain hydrocarbon gas (not including
specific facility. Site-specific emission records of significant changes to combustion flue gas) from emissions
factors are more appropriate for process, N2O abatement technology sources including, but not limited to,
reflecting differences in process design used, abatement technology efficiency, open ended lines, equipment
and operation. abatement utilization factor (percent of
The various approaches to monitoring connections or seals to the atmosphere.
time that abatement system is In the context of this rule, fugitive
GHG emissions are elaborated in the operating), annual testing of N2O
Nitric Acid Production TSD (EPA–HQ– emissions also mean CO2 emissions
emissions, calculation of the site- resulting from combustion of natural gas
OAR–2008–0508–022). specific emission rate factor, and annual in flares. These emissions are hereafter
4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating production of nitric acid. collectively referred to as ‘‘fugitive
Missing Data A full list of records that must be emissions’’ or ‘‘emissions’’. We seek
retained onsite is included in proposed comment on the proposed definition of
For process sources that use a site- 40 CFR part 98, subparts A and V.
specific emission factor, no missing data fugitives, which is derived from the
procedures would apply because the W. Oil and Natural Gas Systems definition of fugitive emissions outlined
site-specific emission factor is derived in the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for
1. Definition of the Source Category National GHG Inventories, and is often
from an annual performance test and
used in each calculation. The emission The U.S. petroleum and natural gas used in the development of GHG
factor would be multiplied by the industry encompasses hundreds of inventories. We acknowledge that there
production rate, which is readily thousands of wells, hundreds of are multiple definitions for fugitives, for
available. If the test data is missing or processing facilities, and over a million example, defining the term fugitives to
lost, the test would have to be repeated. miles of transmission and distribution include ‘‘those emissions which could
Therefore, 100 percent data availability pipelines. This section of the preamble not reasonably pass through a stack,
would be required. identifies relevant facilities and outlines chimney, vent, or other functionally-
methods and procedures for calculating equivalent opening’’. According to the
5. Selection of Data Reporting and reporting fugitive emissions (as 2008 U.S. Inventory, total fugitive
Requirements defined in this section) of CH4 and CO2 emissions of CH4 and CO2 from the
We propose that facilities report from the petroleum and natural gas natural gas and petroleum industry were
annual N2O emissions (in metric tons) industry. Methods and reporting 160 metric tons CO2e in 2006. The
from each nitric acid production line. In procedures for emissions resulting from breakdown of these fugitive emissions is
addition, we propose that facilities natural gas or crude oil combustion in shown in Table W–1 of this preamble.
TABLE W–1. FUGITIVE EMISSIONS FROM PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS SYSTEMS (2006)
Fugitive Fugitive
Sector CH4 CO2
(MMTCO2e) (MMTCO2e)
Natural Gas Systems1 ..................................................................................................................................................... 102.4 28.5

Petroleum Systems .......................................................................................................................................................... 28.4 0.3
1 Emissions account for Natural Gas STAR Partner Reported Reductions.
Natural gas system fugitive CH4 Another factor we considered in CH4 emissions accounted for 5.6 million
emissions resulted from onshore and assessing the applicability of certain metric tons CO2e. The primary sources
offshore natural gas production facilities petroleum and natural gas industry of fugitive emissions from offshore
(27 percent); onshore natural gas fugitive emissions in a mandatory petroleum and natural gas production
processing facilities (12 percent); reporting program is the definition of a are from valves, flanges, open-ended
natural gas transmission and facility. In other words, what physically lines, compressor seals, platform vent
underground natural gas storage, constitutes a facility? This definition is stacks, and other source components.
including LNG import and LNG storage important to determine who the Flare stacks account for the majority of
facilities (37 percent); and natural gas reporting entity would be, and to ensure fugitive CO2 emissions.
distribution facilities (24 percent). that delineation is clear and double Offshore petroleum and natural gas
Natural gas segment fugitive CO2 counting of fugitive emissions is production facilities are proposed for
emissions were primarily from onshore minimized. For some segments of the inclusion due to the fact that this
natural gas processing facilities (74 industry, identifying the facility is clear represents approximately 4 percent of
percent), followed by onshore and since there are physical boundaries and emissions from the petroleum and
offshore natural gas production facilities ownership structures that lend natural gas industry, ‘‘facilities’’ are
(25 percent), and less than 1 percent themselves to identifying scope of clearly defined, and major fugitive
each from natural gas transmission and reporting and responsible reporting emissions sources can be characterized
underground natural gas storage and entities (e.g., onshore natural gas by direct measurement or engineering
distribution facilities.80 processing facilities, natural gas estimation.
Petroleum segment fugitive CH4 transmission compression facilities, and Onshore Natural Gas Processing
emissions are primarily associated with offshore petroleum and natural gas Facilities. Natural gas processing
onshore and offshore crude oil facilities). In other segments of the includes gathering/ boosting stations
production facilities (>97 percent of industry, such as the pipelines between that dehydrate and compress natural gas
emissions) and petroleum refineries (2 compressor stations, and more to be sent to natural gas processing
percent) and are negligible in crude oil particularly onshore petroleum and facilities, and natural gas processing
transportation facilities (<0.5 percent). natural gas production, such facilities that remove NGLs and various
Petroleum segment fugitive CO2 distinctions are not straightforward. In other constituents from the raw natural
emissions are only estimated for defining a facility, we reviewed current gas. The resulting ‘‘pipeline quality’’
onshore and offshore production definitions used in the CAA and ISO natural gas is injected into transmission
facilities. definitions, consulted with industry, pipelines. Compressors are used within
With over 160 different sources of and reviewed current regulations gathering/ boosting stations and also
fugitive CH4 and CO2 emissions in the relevant to the industry. The full results natural gas processing facilities to
petroleum and natural gas industry, of our assessment can be found in the adequately pressurize the natural gas so
identifying those sources most relevant Oil and Natural Gas Systems TSD (EPA– that it can pass through all of the
for a reporting program was a challenge. HQ–OAR–2008–0508–023). processes into the transmission
We developed a decision tree analysis Following is a brief discussion of the pipeline.
and undertook a systematic review of proposed selected and excluded sources Fugitive CH4 emissions from
each emissions source category based on our analysis. Additional reciprocating and centrifugal
included in the Inventory of U.S. GHG information can be found in the Oil and compressors, including centrifugal
Emissions and Sinks. In determining the Natural Gas Systems TSD (EPA–HQ– compressor wet and dry seals,
most relevant fugitive emissions sources OAR–2008–0508–023). This section of reciprocating compressor rod packing,
for inclusion in this reporting program, the preamble addresses only fugitive and all other compressor fugitive
we applied the following criteria: the emissions. Combustion-related emissions, are the primary CH4 emission
coverage of fugitive emissions for the emissions are discussed in Section V.C source from this segment. The majority
source category as a whole, the coverage of this preamble. of fugitive CO2 emissions come from
of fugitive emissions per unit of the Offshore Petroleum and Natural Gas acid gas removal vent stacks, which are
source category, feasibility of a viable Production Facilities. Offshore designed to remove CO2 and hydrogen
monitoring method, including direct petroleum and natural gas production sulfide, when present, from natural gas.
measurement and engineering includes both shallow and deep water While these are the major fugitive
estimations, and an administratively wells in both U.S. State and Federal emissions sources in natural gas
manageable number of reporting waters. These offshore facilities house processing facilities, if other potential
facilities. equipment to extract hydrocarbons from fugitive sources such as flanges, open-
the ocean floor and transport it to ended lines and threaded fittings are
80 The distribution of CO emissions is slightly
2 storage or transport vessels or onshore. present at your facility you would need
misleading due to current U.S. Inventory Fugitive emissions result from sources to account for them if reporting under
convention which assumes that all CO2 from
natural gas processing facilities is emitted. In fact, housed on the platforms. proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart W.
approximately 7,000 metric tons CO2e is captured In 2006, offshore petroleum and For this subpart you would assume no
and used for EOR. natural gas production fugitive CO2 and capture of CO2 because capture and
transfer of CO2 offsite would be send out during periods of high demand ways to define a facility for onshore oil
calculated in accordance with Section (e.g., summer and winter) and gas production and to determine the
V.PP of this preamble and reported Fugitive CH4 and CO2 emissions from responsible reporter. In addition, the
separately. reciprocating and centrifugal Agency also requests comment on the
Onshore natural gas processing compressors, including centrifugal merits and/or concerns with the
facilities are proposed for inclusion due compressor wet and dry seals, corporate basin level reporting approach
to the fact that these operations reciprocating compressor rod packing, under consideration for onshore oil and
represent a significant emissions source, and all other compressor fugitive gas production, as outlined below.
approximately 25 percent of emissions emissions, are the primary CH4 and CO2 One approach we are considering for
from the natural gas segment. emission source from LNG storage including onshore petroleum and
‘‘Facilities’’ are easily defined and major facilities and LNG import facilities. natural gas production fugitive
fugitive emissions sources can be Process units at these facilities can emissions in this reporting rule is to
characterized by direct measurement or include compressors to liquefy natural require corporations to report emissions
engineering estimation. gas (at LNG storage facilities), re- from all onshore petroleum and natural
Onshore Natural Gas Transmission condensers, vaporization units, tanker gas production assets at the basin level.
Compression Facilities and unloading equipment (at LNG import In such a case, all operators in a basin
Underground Natural Gas Storage terminals), transportation pipelines, would have to report their fugitive
Facilities. Natural gas transmission and/or pumps. emissions from their operations at the
compression facilities move natural gas LNG storage facilities and LNG import basin-level. For such a basin-level
throughout the U.S. natural gas facilities are proposed for inclusion due facility definition, we may propose
transmission system. Natural gas is also to the fact that fugitive emissions from reporting of only the major fugitive
injected and stored in underground these operations represent emissions sources; i.e., natural gas
formations during periods of low approximately 1 percent of emissions driven pneumatic valve and pump
demand (e.g., spring or fall) and from natural gas systems. LNG storage devices, well completion releases and
withdrawn, processed, and distributed ‘‘facilities’’ are defined as facilities that flaring, well blowdowns, well
during periods of high demand (e.g., store liquefied natural gas in above workovers, crude oil and condensate
winter or summer). Storage compressor ground storage tanks. LNG import storage tanks, dehydrator vent stacks,
stations are dedicated to gas injection terminal ‘‘facilities’’ are defined as and reciprocating compressor rod
and extraction at underground natural facilities that receive imported LNG, packing. Under this scenario, we might
gas storage facilities. store it in storage tanks, and release re- suggest that all operators would be
Fugitive CH4 emissions from gasified natural gas for transportation. subject to reporting, perhaps exempting
reciprocating and centrifugal Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas small businesses, as defined by the
compressors, including centrifugal Production. Similar to offshore Small Business Administration.
compressor wet and dry seals, petroleum and natural gas production, This approach could substantially
reciprocating compressor rod packing, the onshore petroleum and natural gas reduce the reporting complexity and
and all other compressor fugitive production segment uses wells to draw require individual companies that
emissions, are the primary CH4 emission raw natural gas, crude oil, and produce crude oil and/or natural gas in
source from natural gas transmission associated gas from underground each basin to be responsible for
compression stations and underground formations. The most dominant sources reporting emissions from all of their
natural gas storage facilities. of fugitive CH4 and CO2 emissions onshore petroleum and natural
Dehydrators are also a significant source include, but are not limited to, natural production operations in that basin,
of fugitive CH4 emissions from gas driven pneumatic valve and pump including from rented sources, such as
underground natural gas storage devices, field crude oil and condensate compressors. In cases where
facilities. While these are the major storage tanks, chemical injection hydrocarbons or emissions sources are
fugitive emissions sources in natural gas pumps, releases and flaring during well jointly owned by more than one
transmission, other potential fugitive completion and workovers, and releases company, each company would report
sources include, but are not limited to, and flaring of associated gas. emissions equivalent to its portion of
condensate tanks, open-ended lines and We considered proposing the ownership.
valve seals. reporting of fugitive CH4 and CO2 We considered other options in
Transmission compression facilities emissions from onshore petroleum and defining a facility such as individual
and underground natural gas storage natural gas production in the rule. wellheads or aggregating all emissions
facilities are proposed for inclusion due Onshore petroleum and natural gas sources prior to compression as a
to the fact that these operations production is responsible for the largest facility. However, such definitions
represent a significant emissions source, share of fugitive CH4 and CO2 emissions result in complex reporting
approximately 24 percent of emissions from petroleum and natural gas industry requirements and are difficult to
from the natural gas segment; (27 percent of total emissions). implement.
‘‘facilities’’ are easily defined, and major However, this segment is not proposed We are seeking comments on
fugitive sources can be characterized by for inclusion primarily due to the reporting of the major fugitive emissions
direct measurement or engineering unique difficulty in defining a ‘‘facility’’ sources by corporations at the basin
estimation. in this sector and correspondingly level for onshore petroleum and natural
LNG Import and LNG Storage determining who would be responsible gas production.
Facilities. The U.S. imports natural gas for reporting. Petroleum and Natural Gas Pipeline
in the form of LNG, which is received, Given the significance of fugitive Segments. Natural gas transmission
stored, and, when needed, processed emissions from the onshore petroleum involves high pressure, large diameter
and compressed at LNG import and natural gas production, we would pipelines that transport gas long
terminals. LNG storage facilities liquefy like to take comment on whether we distances from field production and
and store natural gas from transmission should consider inclusion of this source natural gas processing facilities to
pipelines during periods of low demand category in the future. Specifically, we natural gas distribution pipelines or
(e.g., spring or fall) and vaporize for would like to take comment on viable large volume customers such as power
plants or chemical plants. Crude oil lines, connectors, and natural gas driven petroleum and natural gas industry in
transportation involves pump stations to pneumatic valve devices. this rulemaking due to its small
move crude oil through pipelines and Although fugitive emissions from a contribution to total petroleum and
loading and unloading crude oil tanks, single vault, gate station or segment of natural gas fugitive emissions,
marine vessels, and rails. pipeline in the natural gas distribution accounting for much less than 1 percent,
segment may not be significant, and the difficulty in defining a facility.
The majority of fugitive emissions collectively these fugitive emissions
from the transportation of natural gas sources contribute a significant share of 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
occur at the compressor stations, which fugitive emissions from natural gas
are already proposed for inclusion in systems. We propose that facilities with
the rule and discussed above. We do not We do not propose to include the emissions greater than 25,000 metric
propose to include reporting of fugitive natural gas distribution segment of the tons CO2e per year be subject to
emissions from natural gas pipeline natural gas industry in this rulemaking reporting. This threshold is applicable
segments between compressor stations, due to the dispersed nature of the to all oil and natural gas system
or crude oil pipelines in the rulemaking fugitive emissions and difficulty in facilities covered by this subpart:
due to the dispersed nature of the defining a facility such that there would Offshore petroleum and natural gas
fugitive emissions, the difficulty in be an administratively manageable production facilities, onshore natural
defining pipelines as a facility, and the number of reporters. gas processing facilities, including
fact that once fugitives are found, they One approach to address the concern gathering/boosting stations; natural gas
are generally fixed quickly, not allowing with defining a facility for distribution transmission compression facilities,
time for monitoring and direct would be to require corporate-level underground natural gas storage
measurement of the fugitives. reporting of fugitive emissions from facilities; LNG storage facilities; and
major sources by distribution LNG import facilities.
Natural Gas Distribution. In the
companies. We seek comment on this
natural gas distribution segment, high- To identify the most appropriate
and other ways of reporting fugitive
pressure gas from natural gas emissions from the distribution sector. threshold level for reporting of fugitive
transmission pipelines enter ‘‘city gate’’ Crude Oil Transportation. Crude oil is emissions, we conducted analyses to
stations, which reduce the pressure and commonly transported by barge, tanker, determine fugitive emissions reporting
distribute the gas through primarily rail, truck, and pipeline from coverage and facility reporting coverage
underground mains and service lines to production operations and import at four different levels of threshold;
individual end users. Distribution terminals to petroleum refineries or 1,000 metric tons CO2e per year, 10,000
system CH4 and CO2 emissions result export terminals. Typical equipment metric tons CO2e per year, 25,000 metric
mainly from fugitive emissions from associated with these operations are tons CO2e per year, and 100,000 metric
gate stations (metering and regulating storage tanks and pumping stations. The tons CO2e per year. Table W–2 of this
stations) and vaults (regulator stations), major sources of CH4 and CO2 fugitive preamble provides coverage of
and fugitive emissions from emissions include releases from tanks emissions and number of facilities
underground pipelines. At gate stations and marine vessel loading operations. reporting at each threshold level for all
and vaults, fugitive CH4 emissions We do not propose to include the the industry segments under
primarily come from valves, open-ended crude oil transportation segment of the consideration for this rule.
TABLE W–2. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR FUGITIVE EMISSIONS FROM THE PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS INDUSTRY
Total na- Total emissions covered by Facilities covered
tional emis- thresholds s
sions #a Total number Threshold
Source category (metric tons of facilities level (metric tons Number Percent
CO2e per CO2e per Percent
year) year)
Offshore Petroleum & Gas Production

Facilities ............................................ 10,162,179 2,525 1,000 9,783,496 96 1,021 40
10,000 6,773,885 67 156 6
25,000 5,138,076 51 50 2
100,000 3,136,185 31 4 0.5
Natural Gas Processing Facilities ........ 50,211,548 566 1,000 50,211,548 100 566 100
10,000 49,207,852 98 394 70
25,000 47,499,976 95 287 51
100,000 39,041,555 78 125 22
Natural Gas Transmission Compres-
sion Facilities .................................... 73,198,355 1,944 1,000 73,177,039 100 1,659 85
10,000 71,359,167 97 1311 67
25,000 63,835,288 87 874 45
100,000 30,200,243 41 216 11
Underground Natural Gas Storage Fa-
cilities ................................................ 11,719,044 398 1,000 11,702,256 100 346 87
10,000 10,975,728 94 197 49
25,000 9,879,247 84 131 33
100,000 5,265,948 45 35 9
LNG Storage Facilities ......................... 1,956,435 157 1,000 1,940,203 99 54 34
10,000 1,860,314 95 39 25
25,000 1,670,427 85 29 18
100,000 637,477 33 3 2
LNG Import Facilities ........................... 1,896,626 5 1,000 1,896,626 100 5 100
TABLE W–2. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR FUGITIVE EMISSIONS FROM THE PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS INDUSTRY—
Continued
Total na- Total emissions covered by Facilities covered
tional emis- thresholds s
sions #a Total number Threshold
Source category (metric tons of facilities level (metric tons Number Percent
CO2e per CO2e per Percent
year) year)
10,000 1,895,153 99.9 4 80

25,000 1,895,153 99.9 4 80
100,000 1,895,153 99.9 4 80
a The emissions include fugitive CH and CO and combusted CO , N O, and CH gases. The emissions for each industry segment do not
4 2 2 2 4
match the 2008 U.S. Inventory either because of added details in the estimation methodology or use of a different methodology than the U.S. In-
ventory. For additional discussion, refer to the Oil and Natural Gas Systems TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–023).
A proposed threshold of 25,000 and natural gas operations, including emissions sources proposed in this
metric tons CO2e applied to only those the 2006 IPCC Guidelines, U.S. GHG rulemaking, and then quantify
emissions sources listed in Table W–2 Inventory, DOE 1605(b), and corporate emissions using either engineering
of this preamble captures approximately industry protocols developed by the equations or direct measurement.
81 percent of fugitive CH4 and CO2 American Petroleum Institute, the Fugitive emissions from all affected
emissions from the entire oil and Interstate Natural Gas Association of emissions sources at the facility,
natural gas industry, while capturing America, and the American Gas whether in operating condition or on
only a small fraction of total facilities. Association. The methodologies standby, would have to be monitored on
For additional information, please refer proposed vary by the emissions source, an annual basis. The proposed
to the Oil and Natural Gas Systems TSD for example fugitive emissions versus monitoring method would depend on
(EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–023). For vented emissions, versus emissions the fugitive emissions sources in the
specific information on costs, including from flares (all of which are considered facility to be monitored. Each fugitive
unamortized first year capital ‘‘fugitive’’ emissions in this emissions source would be required to
expenditures, please refer to section 4 of rulemaking). Generally, approaches be monitored using one of the two
the RIA and the RIA cost appendix. range from direct measurement (e.g., monitoring methods: (1) Direct
high volume samplers), to engineering measurement or (2) engineering
equations (where applicable), to simple estimation. Table W–3 of this preamble
Methods
emission factor approaches based on provides the proposed fugitive
Many domestic and international national default factors. emissions source and corresponding
GHG monitoring guidelines and Proposed Option. We propose that monitoring methods. General guidance
protocols include methodologies for facilities would be required to detect on the monitoring methods is given
estimating fugitive emissions from oil fugitive emissions from the identified below.
TABLE W–3. SOURCE SPECIFIC MONITORING METHODS AND EMISSIONS QUANTIFICATION

Emission source Monitoring method type Emissions quantification methods
Acid Gas Removal Vent Stacks ......................... Engineering estimation .................................... Simulation software.
Blowdown Vent Stacks ....................................... Engineering estimation .................................... Gas law and temperature, pressure, and vol-
ume between isolation valves.
Centrifugal Compressor Dry Seals ..................... Direct measurement ......................................... (1) High volume sampler, or (2) Calibrated
bag, or (3) Meter.
Centrifugal Compressor Wet Seals .................... Direct measurement ......................................... (1) High volume sampler, or (2) Calibrated
bag, or (3) Meter.
Compressor Fugitive Emissions ......................... Direct measurement ......................................... (1) High volume sampler, or (2) Calibrated
bag, or (3) Meter.
Dehydrator Vent Stacks ..................................... Engineering estimation .................................... Simulation software.
Flare Stacks ....................................................... Engineering estimation and direct measure- Velocity meter and mass/volume equations.
ment.
Natural Gas Driven Pneumatic Pumps .............. (1) Engineering estimation, or (2) Direct (1) Manufacturer data, equipment counts, and
measurement. amount of chemical pumped, or (2) Cali-
brated bag.
Natural Gas Driven Pneumatic Manual Valve (1) Engineering estimation, or (2) Direct (1) Manufacturer data and actuation logs, or
Actuator Devices. measurement. (2) Calibrated bag.
Natural Gas Driven Pneumatic Valve Bleed De- (1) Engineering estimation, or (2) Direct (1) Manufacturer data and equipment counts,
vices. measurement. or (2) High volume sampler, or (3) Cali-
brated bag, or (4) Meter.
Non-pneumatic Pumps ....................................... Direct measurement ......................................... High volume sampler.
Offshore Platform Pipeline Fugitive Emissions .. Direct measurement ......................................... High volume sampler.
Open-ended Lines .............................................. Direct measurement ......................................... (1) High volume sampler, or (2) Calibrated
bag, or (3) Meter.
Pump Seals ........................................................ Direct measurement ......................................... (1) High volume sampler, or (2) Calibrated
bag, or (3) Meter.
Facility Fugitive Emissions ................................. Direct measurement ......................................... High volume sampler.
TABLE W–3. SOURCE SPECIFIC MONITORING METHODS AND EMISSIONS QUANTIFICATION—Continued

Emission source Monitoring method type Emissions quantification methods
Reciprocating Compressor Rod Packing ........... Direct measurement ......................................... (1) High volume sampler, or (2) Calibrated
bag, or (3) Meter.
Storage Tanks .................................................... (1) Engineering estimation and direct meas- (1) Meter, or (2) Simulation software, or (3)
urement, or (2) Engineering estimation. Vasquez-Beggs Equation.
a. Direct Measurement efficient detection of emissions at large variable is the number of times the
Fugitive emissions detection and facilities; however, infrared fugitive compressor is taken offline. Also,
emissions detection instruments are engineering estimates have been
measurement are both required in cases
typically much more expensive than proposed where safety concerns
where direct measurement is being
other options. Organic Vapor Analyzers prohibit the use of direct measurement
proposed. Infrared fugitive emissions
and Toxic Vapor Analyzers are not able methods. For example, sometimes the
detection instruments are capable of
to detect fugitive emissions from many temperature of the fugitive emissions
detecting fugitive CH4 emissions, or
components as quickly; however, for stream for glycol dehydrator vent stacks
Toxic Vapor Analyzers or Organic
small facilities this may provide a less is too high for operators to safely
Vapor Analyzers can be used by the
costly alternative to infrared fugitive measure fugitive emissions. Based on
operator to detect fugitive natural gas
emissions detection without requiring these principles, we propose that direct
emissions. These instruments detect the
overly burdensome labor to perform a measurement is mandatory unless there
presence of hydrocarbons in the natural comprehensive fugitive emissions is a demonstrated and documented
gas fugitive emissions stream. They do survey. We propose that operators safety concern or frequency of fugitive
not detect any pure CO2 fugitive choose the instrument from the choices emission releases is the only variable in
emissions. However, because all the provided in the proposed rule that is emissions, at which time engineering
sources proposed for monitoring have best suited for their circumstance. estimates can be applied.
natural gas fugitive emissions that have Further information is contained in the
CH4 as one of its constituents, there is c. Alternative Monitoring Methods
Oil and Natural Gas Systems TSD (EPA–
no need for a separate detection Considered
HQ–OAR–2008–0508–023).
instrument for separately detecting CO2 For direct measurement, we have Before proposing the monitoring
fugitive emissions. The only exception proposed that high volume samplers, methods discussed above, we
to this is fugitive emissions from acid meters (such as rotameters, turbine considered four additional measurement
gas removal vent stacks where the meters, hot wire anemometers, and methods. The use of Method 21 or the
predominant constituent of the fugitive others), and/or calibrated bags be use of activity and emission factors were
emissions is CO2. Engineering designated for use. However, if fugitive considered for fugitive emissions
estimation is proposed for this source, emissions exceed the maximum range of detection and measurement. Although
and therefore there is no need for the proposed monitoring instrument, Toxic Vapor Analyzers and Organic
detection of fugitive emissions from you would be required to use a different Vapor Analyzers were considered but
acid gas removal vent stacks. instrument option that can measure not proposed for fugitive emissions
In the Oil and Natural Gas Systems larger magnitude emissions levels. For direct measurement they are acceptable
TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–023), example, if a high volume sampler is for fugitive emissions detection.
we describe a particular method based pegged by a fugitive emissions source, Method 21. This is the reference
on practicality of application. For then fugitive emissions would be method for equipment leak detection
example, using Toxic Vapor Analyzers required to be directly measured using and repair regulations for volatile
or Organic Vapor Analyzers on very either calibrated bagging or a meter. In organic carbon (VOC) emissions under
large facilities is not as cost effective as the Oil and Natural Gas Systems TSD several 40 CFR part 60 emission
infrared fugitive emissions detection (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–023), we standards. Method 21 of 40 CFR part 60
instruments. We propose that discuss multiple options for Appendix A–7 determines a
irrespective of the method used for measurement where the range of concentration at a point or points of
fugitive natural gas emissions detection, emissions measurement instruments is emissions expressed in parts per million
the survey for detection must be seen as an issue. CH4 and CO2 fugitive concentration of combustible
comprehensive. This means that, on an emissions from the natural gas fugitive hydrocarbon in the air stream of the
annual basis, the entire population of emissions stream can be calculated instrument probe. This concentration is
emissions sources proposed for fugitive using the composition of natural gas. then compared to the ‘‘action level’’ in
emissions reporting has to be surveyed the referenced 40 CFR part 60 regulation
at least once. When selecting the b. Engineering Estimation to determine if a leak is present.
appropriate emissions detection Engineering estimation has been Although Method 21 was not developed
instrument, it is important to note that proposed for calculating CH4 and CO2 for this purpose, it may allow for better
certain instruments are best suited for fugitive emissions from sources where emission estimation than the overall
particular applications and the variable in the emissions magnitude average emission factors that have been
circumstances. For example, some on an annual basis is the number of published for equipment leaks.
optical infrared fugitive emissions times the source releases fugitive CH4 Quantification of air emissions from
detection instruments may not perform and CO2 emissions to the atmosphere. equipment leaks is generally done using
well in certain weather conditions or For example, when a compressor is EPA published guidelines which
with certain colored backgrounds. taken offline for maintenance, the correlate the measured concentration to
Infrared fugitive emissions detection volume of fugitive CH4 and CO2 a VOC mass emission rate based on
instruments are able to scan hundreds of emissions that are released is the same extensive measurements of air
source components at once, allowing for during each release and the only emissions from leaking equipment. The
correlations are statistically determined exiting the facility, with the difference emissions detection instruments and
for a very large population of similar assumed to be emitted to the usage such that all instruments follow a
components, but not very accurate for atmosphere. This is most often common minimum detection threshold.
single leaks or small populations. discussed for emissions estimation from We may propose the use of the Alternate
Therefore, Method 21 was not found the transportation segment of the Work Practice to Detect Leaks from
suitable for fugitive emissions industry. For transportation, the mass Equipment standards for infrared
measurement under this reporting rule. balance is often not recommended fugitive emissions detection instruments
However, we are seeking comments on because of the uncertainties being developed by EPA. In such a case
this conclusion, and whether Method 21 surrounding meter readings and the all detected emissions from components
should be permitted as a viable large volumes of throughput relative to subject to this rule would require
alternative method to estimate fugitive emissions. We are seeking measurement and reporting.
emissions for sources where it is feedback on the use of a mass balance The second approach would provide
currently required for VOC emissions. approach and the applicability to each an emissions threshold above which the
Activity Factor and Emissions Factor sector of the oil and gas industry source would be identified as an
for All Sources. Fugitive CH4 emissions (production, processing, transmission, ‘‘emitter’’ for emissions detection using
factors for all of the fugitive emissions and distribution) as a potential Organic Vapor Analyzers or Toxic
sources proposed for inclusion in the alternative to component level leak Vapor Analyzers. When using infrared
rule are available in a study that was detection and quantification. fugitive emissions detection instruments
conducted in 1992.81 82 There have been Toxic Vapor Analyzers and Organic all sources subject to this rule that have
no subsequent comparable studies Vapor Analyzers for Emissions emissions detected would require
published to replace or revise the Measurement. Toxic Vapor Analyzer emissions quantification. Alternatively,
fugitive emissions estimates available and Organic Vapor Analyzer the operator would be given a choice of
from this study. However, some instruments quantify the concentration first detecting emissions sources using
petroleum and natural gas industry of combustible hydrocarbon from the the infrared detection instrument and
operations have changed significantly fugitive emission in the air stream, but then verifying for measurement status
with the introduction of new do not directly quantify the volumetric using the emissions definition for
technologies and improved operating or mass emissions. The instrument Organic Vapor Analyzers or Toxic
and maintenance practices to mitigate probe rarely ingests all of the natural gas Vapor Analyzers.
fugitive emissions. These are not from a fugitive emissions source. We are seeking comments on using
reflected in the fugitive emissions Therefore, these instruments are used
the two options discussed above for
factors available. Also, in many cases primarily for fugitive emissions leak
determining emission sources requiring
the fugitive emissions factors are not detection. For the proposed rule,
measurement of emissions.
representative of emission levels for fugitive CH4 emissions detection by
Some fugitive emissions by nature
individual sources or are not relevant to more cost-effective detection
certain operations because the estimates technologies such as infrared fugitive occur randomly within the facility.
were based on limited or no field data. emissions detection instruments in Therefore, there is no way of knowing
Hence, they are not representative of the conjunction with direct measurement when a particular source started
entire country or specific petroleum and methodologies such as the high volume emitting. This proposed rule requires
natural gas facilities and fugitive sampler, meters and calibrated bags is annual fugitive emissions detection and
emissions sources such as tanks and deemed a better overall approach to measurement. The emissions detected
wells. Therefore, we did not propose fugitive emissions quantification than and measured would be assumed to
this method for estimation of the the labor intensive Organic Vapor continue throughout the reporting year,
fugitive emissions for reporting. Analyzers and Toxic Vapor Analyzers, unless no emissions detection is
Default fugitive CO2 emissions factors which do not quantify volumetric or recorded at an earlier and/or later point
are available only for whole segments of mass fugitive emissions. in the reporting period. We recognize
the industry (e.g., natural gas that this may not necessarily be true in
processing), and are not available for d. Outstanding Issues on Which We all cases and that emissions reported
individual sources. Further, these are Seek Comments would be higher than actual. Therefore,
international default factors, which have The proposed rule does not indicate we are seeking comments on how this
a high uncertainty associated with them a particular threshold for detection issue can be resolved without resulting
and are not appropriate for facility-level above which emissions measurement is in additional reporting burden to the
reporting. required. This is because the different facilities.
Mass Balance for Quantification. We emissions detection instruments The petroleum and natural gas
considered, but decided not to propose, proposed have different levels and types industry is already implementing
the use of a mass balance approach for of detection capabilities. Hence the voluntary fugitive emissions detection
quantifying emissions. This approach magnitude of actual emissions can only and repair programs. Such voluntary
would take into account the volume of be determined after measurement. This, programs are useful, but pose an
gas entering a facility and the amount however, does not serve the purpose of accounting challenge with respect to
this rule in limiting burden on emissions reporting for this rule. The
81 EPA/GRI (1996) Methane Emissions from the
emissions reporting. A facility can have proposed rule requires annual detection
Natural Gas Industry. Harrison, M., T. Shires, J. hundreds of small emissions (as low as and measurement of fugitive emissions.
Wessels, and R. Cowgill, (eds.). Radian This approach does not preclude any
International LLC for National Risk Management 3 grams per hour) and it might not be
Research Laboratory, Air Pollution Prevention and practical to measure all such small facility from performing emissions
Control Division, Research Triangle Park, NC. EPA– emissions for reporting. detection and repair prior to the official
600/R–96–080a. To address this issue we intend to detection, measurement, and reporting
82 EPA (1999) Estimates of Methane Emissions
incorporate one of the following two of emissions for this rule. We are
from the U.S. Oil Industry (Draft Report). Prepared
by ICF International. Office of Air and Radiation, approaches in the final rule. seeking comments on how to avoid
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. October The first approach would provide under-reporting of emissions as a result
1999. performance standards for fugitive of a preliminary, ‘‘un-official’’ emissions
survey and repair exercise ahead of the account for relevant source counts and 6. Selection of Records That Must Be
‘‘official’’ annual survey. frequency of fugitive emissions releases Retained
Fugitive emissions from a compressor throughout the year. There should not The reporting facility shall retain
are a function of the mode in which the be any missing data for estimating relevant information associated with the
compressor is operating. Typically, a fugitive emissions from petroleum and monitoring and reporting of fugitive
compressor station consists of several natural gas systems. emissions to us, as follows; throughput
compressors with one (or more) of them of the facility when the fugitive
on standby based on system redundancy 5. Selection of Data Reporting
Requirements emissions direct measurement was
requirements and peak delivery conducted, date(s) of measurement,
capacity. Fugitive emissions at We propose that fugitive emissions
detection and measurement instruments
compressors in standby mode are from the petroleum and natural gas
used, if any, results of the leak detection
significantly different than those from industry be reported on an annual basis.
survey, and inputs and outputs to
compressors that are operating. The rule The reporting should be at a facility
calculations or simulation software runs
proposes annual direct measurement of level with fugitive emissions being
where the proposed monitoring method
fugitive emissions. This may not reported at the source type level.
requires engineering estimation.
adequately account for the different Fugitive emissions from each source A full list of records to be retained is
modes in which a particular compressor type could be reported at an aggregated included inproposed 40 CFR part 98,
is operating through the reporting level. In other words, process unit-level subparts A and W.
period. We are soliciting input on a reporting would not be required. For
method to measure emissions from each example, a facility with multiple X. Petrochemical Production
mode in which the compressor is reciprocating compressors could report 1. Definition of the Source Category
operating, and the period of time fugitive emissions from all reciprocating
operated in that mode, that would compressors as an aggregate number. The petrochemical industry consists
minimize reporting burden. Since the proposed monitoring method of numerous processes that use fossil
Specifically, given the variability of is fugitive emissions detection and fuel or petroleum refinery products as
these measured emissions, EPA requests measurement at the source level, we feedstocks. For this proposed GHG
comment on whether engineering determined that reporting at an reporting rule, the reporting of process-
estimates or other alternative methods aggregate source type level is feasible. related emissions in the petrochemical
that account for total emissions from Fugitive emissions from all sources industry is limited to the production of
compressors, including open ended proposed for monitoring, whether in acrylonitrile, carbon black, ethylene,
lines, could address this issue of operating condition or on standby, ethylene dichloride, ethylene oxide, and
operating versus standby mode. would have to be reported. Any fugitive methanol. The petrochemicals source
The fugitive emissions measurement emissions resulting from standby category includes production of all
instruments (i.e. high volume sampler, sources would be separately identified forms of carbon black (e.g., furnace
calibrated bags, and meters) proposed from the aggregate fugitive emissions. black, thermal black, acetylene black,
for this rule measure natural gas The reporting facility would be and lamp black) because these processes
emissions. CH4 and CO2 emissions are required to report the following use petrochemical feedstocks; bone
required to be estimated from the information to us as a part of the annual black is not considered to be a form of
natural gas mass emissions using fugitive emissions reporting: fugitive carbon black because it is not produced
natural gas composition appropriate for emissions monitored at an aggregate from petrochemical feedstocks. The rule
each facility. For this purpose, the source level for each reporting facility, focuses on these six processes because
proposed rule requires that facilities use assuming no carbon capture and transfer production of GHGs from these
existing gas composition estimates to offsite; the quantity of CO2 captured for processes has been recognized by the
determine CH4 and CO2 components of use and the end use, if known; fugitive IPCC to be significant compared to other
the natural gas emissions (flare stack emissions from standby sources; and petrochemical processes. Facilities
and storage tank fugitive emissions are activity data for each aggregate source producing other types of petrochemicals
an exception to this general rule). We type level. are not subject to proposed 40 CFR part
have determined that these gas Additional data are proposed to be 98, subpart X of this reporting rule but
composition estimates are available reported to support verification: may be subject to 40 CFR part 98,
from facilities reporting to this rule. We Engineering estimate of total component subpart C, General Stationary Fuel
are seeking comments on whether this count; total number of compressors and Combustion Sources, or other subparts.
is a practical assumption. In the absence average operating hours per year for There are 88 facilities operating
of gas composition, an alternative compressors, if applicable; minimum, petrochemical processes in the U.S., and
proposal would be to require the maximum and average throughput per 9 of these operate either two or three
periodic measurement of the required year; specification of the type of any types of petrochemical processes (e.g.,
gas composition for speciation of the control device used, including flares; ethylene and ethylene oxide). We
natural gas mass emissions into CH4 and and detection and measurement estimate petrochemical production
CO2 mass emissions. instruments used. For offshore accounts for approximately 55 million
petroleum and natural gas production metric tons CO2e.
4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating facilities, the number of connected Total GHG emissions relevant to the
Missing Data wells, and whether they are producing petrochemical industry primarily
The proposal requires data collection oil, gas, or both is proposed to be include process-based emissions and
for a single source a minimum of once reported. For compressors specifically, emissions from combustion sources.
a year. If data are lost or an error occurs we proposed that the total number of Process-based emissions may be
during fugitive emissions direct compressors and average operating released to the atmosphere from process
measurement, the operator should carry hours per year be reported. vents, equipment leaks, aerobic
out the direct measurement a second A full list of data to be reported is biological treatment systems, and in
time to obtain the relevant data point(s). included in proposed 40 CFR part 98, some cases, combustion source vents.
Similarly, engineering estimates must subparts A and W. CH4 may also be a process-based
emission from processes where CH4 is a necessary to avoid either double Emissions from supplemental fuel
feedstock (e.g., when methanol is counting or not counting these combustion predominate for ethylene
produced from synthesis gas that is emissions, particularly if off-gas and dichloride processes. Equipment leak
derived from reforming natural gas, supplemental fuel are mixed in a fuel and wastewater emissions are both
some CH4 passes through the process gas system. estimated to be less than 1 percent of
without being converted and is emitted). CH4 emissions from onsite wastewater the total emissions from petrochemical
Emissions from the burning of process treatment systems (if anaerobic) are production.
off-gas to supply energy to the process another possible source of GHG For further discussion see the
are also process-based emissions emissions from the petrochemical Petrochemical Production TSD (EPA-
because the organic compounds being industry, but these emissions are HQ-OAR–2008–0508–024).
burned are derived from the feedstock expected to be small because anaerobic
chemical. These emissions are included 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
wastewater treatment is not common at
with other process-based emissions if petrochemical facilities. CH4 emissions We propose that every facility which
the mass balance monitoring method from onsite wastewater treatment includes within its boundaries
(described in Section V.X.3 of this systems would be estimated and methanol, acrylonitrile, ethylene,
preamble) is used to estimate process- reported according to the proposed ethylene oxide, ethylene dichloride, or
based emissions, but they are included procedures in proposed 40 CFR part 98, carbon black production be subject to
with combustion source emissions if subpart II. the requirements of this proposed rule.
CEMS are used to measure emissions The ratio of process-based emissions In developing the proposed threshold
from all stacks. Combustion source to supplemental fuel combustion for petrochemical facilities, we
emissions include CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions varies among the various considered emissions-based thresholds
emissions from combustion of either petrochemical processes. For example, of 1,000 metric tons CO2e, 10,000 metric
supplemental fuel alone (under the process-based emissions dominate for tons CO2e, 25,000 metric tons CO2e and
mass balance option) or combustion of acrylonitrile, ethylene, and ethylene 100,000 metric tons CO2e. Table X–1 of
both supplemental fuels and process off- oxide processes. Both process-based and this preamble illustrates the emissions
gas (under the CEMS option). This supplemental fuel combustion and number of facilities that would be
difference in approach for emissions emissions are important for carbon covered under the four threshold
from the combustion of off-gas is black and methanol processes. options.
TABLE X–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR PETROCHEMICAL PRODUCTION

Total National Emissions covered Facilities covered
Total number
Emissions,
Threshold level metric tons CO2e/yr of
metric tons Metric tons Number of
facilities Percent Percent
CO2e/yr CO2e/yr facilities
1,000 ........................................................ 54,830,000 88 54,830,000 100 88 100

10,000 ...................................................... 54,830,000 88 54,820,000 99.98 87 98.9
25,000 ...................................................... 54,830,000 88 54,820,000 99.98 87 98.9
100,000 .................................................... 54,830,000 88 54,440,000 99.7 84 95.5
The emissions presented in Table X– combustion and process-based GHG 3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring
1 of this preamble are the total emissions that exceed the 25,000 metric Methods
emissions associated solely with the tons CO2e/yr threshold, and 1 facility We reviewed existing domestic and
production of methanol, acrylonitrile, has estimated GHG emissions less than international GHG monitoring
ethylene, ethylene oxide, ethylene 10,000 metric tons CO2e/yr. The facility guidelines and protocols including the
dichloride, or carbon black, not the total with estimated GHG emissions less than 2006 IPCC Guidelines and DOE 1605(b).
emissions from petrochemical facilities. 10,000 metric tons CO2e/yr is a carbon Protocols included methods for both
An estimate of the total emissions was black facility. Considering that the CO2 and CH4. From this review, we
difficult to develop because many of threshold analysis did not include all developed the following three options
these facilities contain multiple source types of emissions occurring at that share a number of features with the
categories. For example, some petrochemical facilities, and the large three Tiers presented by IPCC:
petrochemical operations occur at percentage of facilities that were above Option 1. Apply default emission
petroleum refineries. Other the various thresholds even when these factors based on the type of process and
petrochemical manufacturing facilities emissions were excluded, EPA proposes site-specific activity data (e.g., measured
produce chemicals such as ammonia or that all facilities producing at least one or estimated annual production rate).
hydrogen that are also subject to of the petrochemicals report. This This option is the same as the IPCC Tier
reporting. In addition, numerous would simplify the rule and likely 1 approach.
chemical manufacturing facilities achieve the same result as having a Option 2. Perform a carbon balance to
produce other chemicals in addition to 25,000 metric tons CO2e threshold. estimate CO2 emissions derived from
one or more of the petrochemicals; these For a full discussion of the threshold carbon in feedstocks. Inputs to the
facilities may have combustion sources analysis, please refer to the carbon balance would be the flow and
associated with these other chemical Petrochemical Production TSD (EPA– carbon content of each feedstock, and
manufacturing processes that are HQ–OAR–2008–0508–024). For specific outputs would be the flow and carbon
separate from the combustion sources information on costs, including content of each product/byproduct.
for petrochemical processes. unamortized first year capital Organic liquid wastes that are collected
Based on this analysis, 87 of the 88 expenditures, please refer to section 4 of for shipment offsite would also be
petrochemical facilities have estimated the RIA and the RIA cost appendix. considered an output in the carbon
balance. The difference between carbon different methodologies for estimating product. Uncertainty may be high where
inputs and outputs is assumed to be CO2 emissions. the percentage of carbon in the product
emissions. This includes all In addition to measuring CO2 is close to 100 percent (since subtracting
unconverted CH4 feedstock that is emissions from process vents and one large number for process output
emitted. In addition, all CO2 that is estimating CO2 emissions from flares, from another large number for process
recovered for sale or other use is this option would require the input results in relatively large
considered an emission for the purposes petrochemical facility owner to uncertainty in the difference, even if the
of reporting for petrochemical calculate CH4 and N2O emissions from uncertainty in the two large numbers is
processes. However, the volume of CO2 combustion sources using the low). For the petrochemical processes,
would be accounted for separately using monitoring methods in proposed 40 we have decided that Option 2 is
the procedures in proposed 40 CFR part CFR part 98, subpart C, and to calculate reasonable for purposes of this proposed
98, subpart PP. CH4 emissions from onsite wastewater rulemaking. However, direct
This option would require continuous treatment systems using the monitoring measurement may provide improved
monitoring of liquid and gaseous flows methods in proposed 40 CFR part 98, emissions estimates.
using flow meters, measurement of solid subpart II. Option 1 was not proposed because
feedstock and product flows using Proposed Options. Under this the use of default values and lack of
scales or other weighing devices, and proposed rule, if you operate and direct measurement results in a high
determination of the carbon content of maintain an existing CEMS that level of uncertainty. These default
each feedstock and product/byproduct measures total CO2 from process vents approaches would not provide site-
at least once per week. Supplemental and combustion sources, you would be specific estimates of emissions that
fuel is not considered to be a feedstock required to follow requirements of would reflect differences in feedstocks,
because these fuels do not mix with proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C to operating conditions, catalyst
process fluids (except in the furnace of estimate CO2 emissions from your selectivity, thermal/energy efficiencies,
a carbon black process) and would be facility. In such a circumstance, you and other differences among plants. The
calculated consistent with the also would be required to estimate CO2, use of default values is more
monitoring methods in proposed 40 CH4 and N2O emissions from flares. appropriate for sector wide or national
If you do not operate and maintain an total estimates from aggregated activity
CFR part 98, subpart C.
existing CEMS that measures total CO2 data than for determining emissions
In addition to using the carbon from process vents and combustion
balance to estimate process-based CO2 from a specific facility.
sources for your facility, the proposed We request comment on how to
emissions, this option would require the rule permits the use of either Options 2 improve the emission estimates
petrochemical facility owner to estimate or 3 since they account for process- developed using the carbon balance
CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions from the based emissions, combustion source approach (Option 2), including whether
combustion of supplemental fuels using emissions, and wastewater treatment the uncertainty in the estimated
the monitoring methods in proposed 40 system emissions. Process-based CO2 emissions can be reduced (and if so, by
CFR part 98, subpart C, and to estimate emissions are estimated using how much), the advantages,
CH4 emissions from onsite wastewater procedures in proposed 40 CFR part 98, disadvantages, types and frequency of
treatment using the monitoring methods subpart X; combustion emissions (CO2, other measurements that could be
in proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart II. CH4, and N2O) and wastewater required, costs of alternatives, how the
Option 3. Direct and continuous emissions (CH4) are calculated using uncertainty of alternatives is estimated,
measurement of CO2 emissions from methods in proposed 40 CFR part 98, and the QA procedures that should be
each stack (process vent or combustion subparts C and II, respectively. As followed to assure accurate
source) using a CEMS for CO2 discussed earlier, emissions from measurement. For further discussion of
concentration and a stack gas combustion of process off-gas are our assumptions on the uncertainty of
volumetric flow rate monitor. calculated with other process-based emissions estimates see the
This option also would require the emissions (only CO2 emissions) under Petrochemical Production TSD (EPA–
petrochemical facility owner to use Option 2, but they are estimated using HQ–OAR–2008–0508–024).
engineering analyses to estimate flow methods for combustion sources under Additional Issues and Requests for
and carbon content of gases discharged Option 3 (CO2, CH4, and N2O Comments. EPA is interested in public
to flares using the same procedures emissions). Option 2 offers greater comment on four additional issues.
described in Section V.Y.3 of this flexibility and a lower cost of Fugitive emissions from
preamble for petroleum refineries. Just compliance than Option 3. However it petrochemical production facilities have
as at petroleum refineries, flares at also has a higher measurement been of environmental interest primarily
petrochemical facilities are used to uncertainty. because of the VOC emissions. As noted
control a variety of emissions releases. Option 3 is expected to have the above, we have concluded that fugitive
In addition, the flow and composition of lowest measurement uncertainty. CO2 and CH4 emissions contribute very
gas flared can change significantly. However, using CEMS to monitor all little to the overall GHG emissions from
Therefore, the Agency is proposing the emissions at petrochemical facilities the petrochemical production sector,
same methodology for petrochemical would be relatively costly. For and non-CH4 hydrocarbon losses
flares as for flares at petroleum emissions estimates produced using assumed to be CO2 emissions overstate
refineries. Please refer to the petroleum Option 2, the uncertainty in these the emissions only slightly.
refineries section (Section V.Y.3 of this estimates is expected to be relatively Consequently, the Agency is not
preamble) for a discussion of the low for most petrochemical processes. proposing that fugitive emissions be
rationale for these procedures. For ethylene dichloride and ethylene reported.
We request comment on this approach processes, the uncertainty of the carbon Second, Option 2 assumes all carbon
as well as on descriptions of differences balance approach may be higher since it entering the process is released as CO2
in operating conditions for flares at is influenced by the measurements of and does not account for potential CH4
petrochemical facilities and refineries inputs and outputs at the facility and emissions, nor are N2O emissions
that would warrant specification of the percentage of carbon in the final estimated in this approach. EPA
believes CH4 and N2O emissions are Where the carbon balance method is operating petroleum refineries in the
small. used, we propose that the following U.S. and its territories. Emissions from
Third, EPA is aware that a limited information be reported: Identification petroleum refineries account for
number of petrochemical facilities may of the process, annual CO2 emissions for approximately 205 million metric tons
produce petrochemicals as well as one each type of petrochemical produced CO2e, representing approximately 3
or more other chemicals that are part of and each process unit, the methods used percent of the U.S. nationwide GHG
another source category (e.g.production to determine flows and carbon contents, emissions. Most of these emissions are
of hydrogen for sale and the the emissions calculation methodology, CO2 emissions from fossil fuel
petrochemical methanol from synthesis quantity of feedstocks consumed, combustion. While the U.S. GHG
gas created by steam reforming of CH4). quantity of each product and byproduct Inventory does not separately report
We consider these ‘‘integrated produced, carbon contents of each onsite fuel consumption at petroleum
processes’’ and request comment on feedstock and product, information on refineries, it estimates that
whether the procedures for the affected the number of actual versus substitute approximately 0.6 million metric tons
source categories are clear and adequate data points, and the quantity of CO2 CO2e of CH4 are emitted as fugitives per
for addressing emissions from integrated captured for use. In addition, owners year from petroleum refineries in the
facilities. and operators would report information U.S. Most CO2 emissions at a refinery
Fourth, we are proposing several related to all equipment calibrations; are combustion-related, accounting for
methods for measuring the volume, measurements, calculations, and other approximately 67 percent of CO2
carbon content and composition of data; certifications; and any other QA emissions at a refinery.
feedstocks and products. There may be procedures used to assess the The combustion of catalyst coke in
additional peer-reviewed and published uncertainty in emissions estimates. catalyst cracking units is also a
measurement methodologies. The data to be reported under the
significant contributor to the CO2
Public comment on each of these four proposed rule form the basis of the
emissions (approximately 25 percent)
issues is welcomed. Where applicable, emissions calculations and are needed
from petroleum refineries. Combustion
supporting data and documentation on for us to understand the emissions data
of excess or waste fuel gas in flares
how emissions should be included, and and verify reasonableness of the
contributes approximately 2 percent of
if so, how these emissions can be reported emissions. The Agency
the refinery’s overall CO2 emissions. As
estimated, including the advantages, requests comment on the types of QA
such, the Agency proposes that the
disadvantages, types and frequency of procedures that are most commonly
emissions from these sources must be
measurements that could be required, conducted or recommended and the
reported.
costs of alternatives, how the information that would be most useful
in assessing uncertainty of the Process emissions of CO2 also occur
uncertainty of alternatives is estimated, from the sulfur recovery plant, because
and the QA procedures that should be emissions estimates.
the amine solutions used to remove
followed to assure accurate 6. Selection of Records That Must Be hydrogen sulfide (H2S) from the
measurement. Retained refinery’s fuel gas adsorb CO2. The
4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating Petrochemical production facilities stripped sour gas from the amine
Missing Data would be required to keep records of the adsorbers is fed to the sulfur recovery
information specified in proposed 40 plant; the CO2 contained in this stream
The missing data procedures in
CFR 98.3, as applicable. Under the is subsequently released to the
proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C for
carbon balance option, a facility also atmosphere. Most refineries have on-site
combustion units are proposed for
would be required to keep records of all sulfur recovery plants; however, a few
facilities that use CEMS to estimate
feedstock and product flows and carbon refineries send their sour gas to
emissions from both combustion
content determinations. If a neighboring sulfur recovery or sulfuric
sources and process vents. Similarly, if
petrochemical production facility acid production facilities. The quantity
the mass balance option is used, the
complies with the CEMS option, the of CO2 contained in the sour gas sent for
same procedures that apply to missing
additional records for CEMS listed in off-site sulfur recovery operations is
data for fuel measurements in proposed
proposed 40 CFR 98.37 would also be considered an emission under this
40 CFR part 98, subpart C would also
required for all CEMS, including CEMS regulation.
apply to missing flow and carbon
content measurements of feedstocks and on process stacks that are not associated There are a variety of GHG emission
products. Specifically, the substitute with combustion sources. These records sources at the refinery, which include:
data value for missing carbon content, document values that are directly used Asphalt blowing, delayed coking unit
CO2 concentration, or stack gas moisture to calculate the emissions that are depressurization and coke cutting, coke
content values would be the average of reported and are necessary to enable calcining, blowdown systems, process
the quality-assured values of the verification that the GHG emissions vents, process equipment leaks, storage
parameter immediately before and monitoring and calculations were done tanks, loading operations, land disposal,
immediately after the missing data correctly. wastewater treatment, and waste
period. The substitute data value for Y. Petroleum Refineries disposal. To fully account for the
missing feedstock, product, or stack gas refinery’s GHG emissions, we propose
flows would be the best available 1. Definition of the Source Category that the emissions from these sources
estimate based on all available process Petroleum refineries are facilities must also be reported.
data. engaged in producing gasoline, Based on the emission sources at
kerosene, distillate fuel oils, residual petroleum refineries, GHGs to report
5. Selection of Data Reporting fuel oils, lubricants, asphalt (bitumen), under proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart
Requirements or other products through distillation of Y are limited to CO2, CH4, and N2O.
Where CEMS are used, the reporting petroleum or through redistillation, Table Y–1 of this preamble summarizes
requirements specified in proposed 40 cracking, or reforming of unfinished the GHGs to be reported by emission
CFR part 98, subpart C would apply. petroleum derivatives. There are 150 source at the refinery.
TABLE Y–1. GHGS TO REPORT UNDER 40 CFR PART 98, SUBPART Y

Subpart of proposed 40 CFR part 98
Emission source GHGs to report where emissions reporting methodologies
addressed
Stationary combustion sources ........................................ CO2, CH4, and N2O .................................. Subpart C.
Coke burn-off emissions from catalytic cracking units, CO2, CH4, and N2O .................................. Subpart Y.
fluid coking units, catalytic reforming units, and coke
calcining units.
Flares ................................................................................ CO2, CH4, and N2O .................................. Subpart Y.
Hydrogen plant vent ......................................................... CO2 and CH4 ............................................ Subpart P.
Petrochemical processes .................................................. CO2 and CH4 ............................................ Subpart X.
Sulfur recovery plant, on-site and off-site ......................... CO2 ........................................................... Subpart Y.
On-site wastewater treatment system .............................. CO2 and CH4 ............................................ Subpart II.
On-site land disposal unit ................................................. CH4 ........................................................... Subpart HH.
Fugitive Emissions ............................................................ CO2, CH4, and N2O .................................. Subpart Y.
Delayed coking units ........................................................ CH4 ........................................................... Subpart Y.
2. Selection of Reporting Threshold refineries. Table Y–2 of this preamble facilities that would be covered under
Four options were considered as illustrates the emissions and number of the four options.
reporting thresholds for petroleum
TABLE Y–2. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR PETROLEUM REFINING
Option/threshold level Million met-

ric tons Percent Number Percent
CO2e/year
1,000 metric tons CO2e ............................................................................................... 204.75 100 150 100

10,000 metric tons CO2e ............................................................................................. 204.74 99.995 149 99.3
25,000 metric tons CO2e ............................................................................................. 204.69 99.97 146 97.3
100,000 metric tons CO2e ........................................................................................... 203.75 99.51 128 85.3
We are proposing that all petroleum 3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring 40 CFR part 98, subpart C to estimate
refineries should report. This approach Methods combustion-related CH4 and N2O
would ensure full reporting of emissions.
We considered monitoring methods For facilities that do not currently
emissions, affect an insignificant that are used or recommended for use
number of additional sources compared have CEMS that meet the requirements
from several sources including outlined in proposed 40 CFR part 98,
to the 25,000 metric tons CO2e international groups, U.S. agencies,
threshold, and would add minimal subpart C, or where the CEMS would
State agencies, and petroleum refinery not adequately account for process
additional burden to the reporting trade organizations. For most emission emissions, the proposed monitoring
facilities. All U.S. refineries must report sources, three general levels of method is Option 2. Option 2 accounts
their fuel consumption to the EIA, so monitoring options were evaluated: (1) for process-related CO2 emissions.
there is limited additional burden to Use of engineering calculations and/or Simplified methods for estimating
estimate their GHG emissions. default factors; (2) monitoring of process fugitive CH4 emissions are provided
Furthermore, due to the importance of parameters (such as fuel consumption below. Refer to proposed 40 CFR part
the petroleum refining industry to our quantities and carbon content); and (3) 98, subpart C specifically for procedures
nation’s energy needs as well as the direct emission measurement using to estimate combustion-related CH4 and
overall U.S. GHG inventory, it is CEMS for all emissions sources at a N2O emissions.
important to obtain the best information refinery. You would be required to follow the
available for this source category. We Under this proposed rule, if you are calculation procedures, monitoring and
estimate that 4 refineries did not exceed required to use an existing CEMS to QA/QC methods, missing data
a reporting threshold of 25,000 metric meet the requirements outlined in procedures, reporting requirements, and
tons CO2e in 2006 and invite public proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C, you recordkeeping requirements of proposed
comment on this matter. would be required to use CEMS to 40 CFR part 98, subpart HH to estimate
estimate CO2 emissions. Where the emissions from landfills, proposed 40
For a full discussion of the threshold
CEMS capture all combustion- and CFR part 98, subpart II to estimate
analysis, please refer to the Petroleum
process-related CO2 emissions you emissions from wastewater and
Refineries TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– would be required to follow the proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart P to
0508–025). For specific information on calculation procedures, monitoring and estimate emissions from hydrogen
costs, including unamortized first year QA/QC methods, missing data production (non-merchant hydrogen
capital expenditures, please refer to procedures, reporting requirements, and plants only).
section 4 of the RIA and the RIA cost recordkeeping requirements of proposed Specifically, for fluid catalytic
appendix. 40 CFR part 98, subpart C to estimate cracking units and fluid coking units
CO2 emissions. Also, refer to proposed that already have CEMS in place, we
propose to require refineries to report subpart UUU) as an alternative to factors for refinery gas are proposed to
CO2 emissions using these CEMS. For continuous flow monitoring. calculate CH4 and N2O emissions from
the sources that contribute significantly An engineering approach for flares.
to the overall GHG emissions from the estimating coke burn-off rates and Sulfur Recovery Plants. For sulfur
refinery, as defined below, we propose calculating CO2 emissions using default recovery plants at the petroleum
monitoring of process parameters carbon content for petroleum coke was refinery and for instances where sour
(Option 2). The Agency requests considered. However, as most catalytic gas is sent off-site for sulfur recovery,
comment on the feasibility of allowing cracking units already must have the direct carbon content measurement in
smaller emission sources at the refinery compositional monitors in-place due to the sour gas feed to the sulfur recovery
to employ less certain (Option 1) other petroleum refinery rules and plant is the preferred monitoring
methods as a way to reduce the costs because catalytic cracking unit coke approach. However, a site-specific or
and burden of measurement and burn-off is a significant contributor to default carbon content method is also
verification under this proposed rule. the overall GHG emissions from provided. It is anticipated that
Providing this flexibility would result in petroleum refineries, we are not monitoring systems would be in place at
lower costs but greater uncertainty proposing an engineering calculation for most refineries, as monitoring of the
around some portions of a facility’s the catalytic cracking units. However, sour gas feed is important in the
emissions estimates. comment is requested on the operation of the sulfur recovery plant.
The selected monitoring methods for engineering methods available to The monitoring data for carbon content
this proposed rule generally follow estimate coke burn-off rates, the and flow rate must be used if they are
those used in other reporting rules as uncertainty of the methods, and the available. The alternative default carbon
well as those recommended in the measurements or parameters and content method is provided because the
American Petroleum Institute’s enhanced QA that can be used to verify emissions from this source are relatively
Compendium of Greenhouse Gas the engineering emission estimates and small, 1 to 2 percent for a given facility,
Emissions Estimation Methodologies for their certainty. and because only small, non-Claus
the Oil and Gas Industry (hereafter The amount of coke burned in sulfur recovery plants are not expected
referred to as ‘‘the API Compendium’’). catalytic reforming units is estimated to to monitor the flow and composition of
More detail regarding the selection of be about 1 percent of the amount of coke the sour gas. We are proposing that only
the proposed monitoring options for burned in catalytic cracking units or CO2 emissions would need to be
specific emission sources follows. fluid coking units; therefore, a
reported for the sulfur recovery plant
Coke burn-off. The proposed methods simplified method is provided for
process-related emissions.
for estimating GHG emissions from coke estimating coke burn-off emissions for
Coke Calcining. For coke calcining
burn-off in the catalytic cracking unit, catalytic reforming units that do not
units at the petroleum refinery, direct
fluid coking unit, and catalytic monitor gas composition in the coke
CO2 measurement is the preferred
reforming unit generally follow the burn-off exhaust vent.
Flares. Specific monitoring provisions monitoring approach. However, a
methods presented in the API
Compendium for coke burn-off. Fluid are provided for flares. As the carbon balance approach is proposed
catalytic cracking units and fluid coking composition of gas flared can change similar to the approach included in The
units are large CO2 emission sources, significantly, we considered proposing Aluminum Sector Greenhouse Gas
accounting for over 25 percent of the continuous flow and composition Protocol 83 for units that do not have
GHG emissions from petroleum monitors (or heating value monitors) on CEMS. This is because coke calcining is
refineries. Most of these units are all flares. For example, in California, a small source of GHG emissions, less
expected to monitor gas composition for both the South Coast and Bay Area Air than 1 percent for a given facility. CH4
process control or for compliance with Quality Management Districts require and N2O emissions are calculated from
applicable monitoring provisions under these monitors for refineries located in the coke calcining CO2 process
40 CFR part 60, subparts J and Ja and their districts. However, a significant emissions using the default emission
under 40 CFR part 63, subpart UUU. fraction of flares is not expected to have factors for petroleum coke combustion
Given the magnitude of the GHG these monitoring systems installed. (the same equations as proposed for
emissions from catalytic cracking units Further, since flares are projected to calculating CH4 and N2O emissions from
and fluid coking units, direct contribute only about 2 percent of a coke burn-off).
monitoring for CO2 emissions (i.e., typical refinery’s CO2 emissions, it Process Vents not Otherwise
continuous monitoring of CO2 would be costly to improve the Specified. For process vents other than
concentration and flow rate at the final monitoring systems for flare emission those discussed elsewhere in this
exhaust stack) is believed to provide estimates. The use of the default CO2 section of the preamble, either process
greater certainty in the emission emission factor for refinery fuel gas was knowledge or measurement data can be
estimate. However, compositional also considered. The default emission used to calculate the GHG emissions.
analysis monitoring in the regenerator factor is expected to be reasonable Due to other regulations affecting
or fluid coking burner exhaust vent during normal refinery operations, but petroleum refineries, only a few, small
prior to the combustion of other fuels is highly uncertain during periods of process vents are expected to be present
(such as auxiliary fuel fired to a CO start-up, shutdown, or malfunction. at most refineries. As such, these small
boiler) may be used when direct Consequently, a hybrid method is vents do not warrant requiring the use
monitoring for CO2 emissions is not proposed that allows the use of a default of CEMS to quantify emissions. Process
already employed. An equation is CO2 emission factor for refinery fuel gas vent emissions are expected to be
provided in the rule for calculating the during periods of normal refinery predominately CO2 or CH4, but N2O
vent stream flow rate based on the operations and specific engineering
compositional analysis data rather than analysis of GHG emissions during 83 International Aluminum Institute. 2006. The
requiring a continuous flow monitor; periods of high flare volumes associated Aluminum Sector Greenhouse Gas Protocol
(Addendum to the WRI/WBCSD Greenhouse Gas
this equation is allowed in other with start-up, shutdown, or Protocol). pp. 31–32. Available at: http://
petroleum refinery rules (40 CFR part malfunction. As with stationary www.world-aluminium.org/Downloads/
60, subparts J and Ja; 40 CFR part 63, combustion sources, default emission Publications/Download.
emissions, if present, are also to be Combustion Sources. For other sources, phosphate fertilizers. Phosphoric acid is
reported. we propose to report the identification a product of the reaction between
Other Sources. Due to the small (less of the source, throughput of the source phosphate rock and, typically, sulfuric
than 1 percent) contribution of other (if applicable), the calculation acid (H2SO4). A byproduct called
emissions sources at the refinery that methodology used, the total GHG calcium sulfate (CaSO4), or gypsum, is
make up the total GHG emissions from emissions for the source, and the formed when calcium from the
the facility, very simple methods are quantity of CO2 captured for use and the phosphate rock reacts with sulfate. Most
proposed to estimate these other end use, if known. A list of the specific companies in the U.S. use a dihydrate
emissions sources. Alternative methods GHG emissions reportable for each process in which two molecules of
are provided so that facilities can emission source is provided in Table Y– water (H2O) are produced per molecule
provide more detailed estimates if 1 of this preamble. of gypsum (CaSO4 · 2 H2O or calcium
desired. For example, a refinery may The reporting requirements consist of sulfate dihydrate).
estimate CH4 emissions from individual actual GHG emission values as well as Additionally, a second reaction
tanks using EPA’s TANKS model, if values that are directly used to calculate occurs in which the limestone (CaCO3)
desired, or apply a default emission the emissions and are necessary in order present in the phosphate rock reacts
factor to the facility’s overall to verify that the GHG emissions with sulfuric acid (H2SO4) releasing
throughput. Simple emission factor monitoring and calculations were done CO2. The amount of carbon in the
approaches are provided for asphalt correctly. As there are high phosphate rock feedstock varies
blowing, delayed coking unit uncertainties associated with many of depending on the region in which it was
depressurization and coke cutting, the ancillary emission sources at the mined.
blowdown systems, process equipment refinery, separate reporting of the National emissions from phosphoric
leaks, storage tanks, and loading emissions for these separate sources is acid production facilities were
operations. needed to fully understand the estimated to be 3.8 million metric tons
For further discussion of this source importance and variability of these CO2e in 2006. These emissions include
category and monitoring of its ancillary emission sources. A complete both process-related emissions (CO2)
emissions, see the Petroleum Refineries list of information to report is contained and on-site stationary combustion
TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–025). in proposed 40 CFR 98.256. emissions (CO2, CH4 and N2O) from 14
4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating 6. Selection of Records That Must Be phosphoric acid production facilities
Missing Data Retained across the U.S. Process-related
In those cases where you use direct emissions account for 1.2 million metric
The recordkeeping requirements in tons CO2e, or 30 percent of the total,
measurement by a CO2 CEMS, the the general provisions of proposed 40
missing data procedures would be the while on-site stationary combustion
CFR part 98 apply for petroleum emissions account for the remaining 2.7
same as the Tier 4 requirements refineries. Specifically, refineries would
described for general stationary fuel million metric tons CO2e emissions.
be required to keep all records specified The phosphoric acid production
combustion sources in proposed 40 CFR in proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart A
part 98, subpart C. Missing data industry has many production sites that
and summarized in Section III.E of this are integrated with mines; notably, three
procedures are also specified, consistent preamble. In addition, records of the
with proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart facilities import phosphate rock from
data required to be monitored and Morocco.
C, for heat content, carbon content, fuel reported under proposed 40 CFR part
molecular weight, gas and liquid fuel For additional background
98, subpart Y would be retained. If information on phosphoric acid
flow rates, stack gas flow rates, and CEMS are used to quantify the GHG
compositional analysis data (CO2, CO, production, please refer to the
emissions, you would be required to Phosphoric Acid Production TSD (EPA–
O2, CH4, N2O, and stack gas moisture keep additional records specified in
content, as applicable). Generally, the HQ–OAR–2008–0508–026).
proposed 40 CFR part 98, subparts A
average of the data measurements before and Y. These records consist of values 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
and after the missing data period would that are directly used to calculate the
be used to calculate the emissions In developing the threshold for
emissions and are necessary to enable phosphoric acid production, we
during the missing data period. verification that the GHG emissions considered emissions-based thresholds
5. Selection of Data Reporting monitoring and calculations were done of 1,000 metric tons CO2e, 10,000 metric
Requirements correctly. tons CO2e, 25,000 metric tons CO2e and
The reporting requirements for Z. Phosphoric Acid Production 100,000 metric tons CO2e per year.
combustion sources other than those Table Z–1 of this preamble illustrates
associated with coke burn-off directly 1. Definition of the Source Category the emissions and number of facilities
refer to those in proposed 40 CFR part Phosphoric acid is a common would not be impacted under these
98, subpart C, General Stationary Fuel industrial product used to manufacture various applicability thresholds.
TABLE Z–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR PHOSPHORIC ACID PRODUCTION

Threshold level metric tons emissions Total number
CO2e/yr metric tons of facilities Metric tons
CO2e/yr CO2e/yr Percent Number Percent
1,000 ........................................................ 3,838,036 14 3,838,036 100 14 100

10,000 ...................................................... 3,838,036 14 3,838,036 100 14 100
25,000 ...................................................... 3,838,036 14 3,838,036 100 14 100
100,000 .................................................... 3,838,036 14 3,838,036 100 14 100
There is no proposed threshold for the necessary equipment on-site for calculate emissions. They are needed for
reporting emissions from phosphoric conducting chemical analyses of the us to understand the emissions data and
acid production. Even at a 100,000 inorganic carbon weight fraction of the assess the reasonableness of the
metric tons CO2e threshold, all phosphate rock and that this analysis is reported emissions. A full list of data to
emissions would be covered, and all conducted on a routine basis at be reported is included in proposed40
facilities would be required to report. facilities. Facilities importing rock from CFR part 98, subparts A and Z.
Having no threshold would simplify the Morocco would send rock samples off-
6. Selection of Records That Must Be
rule and avoid any burden for site for composition analysis. The
Retained
unnecessary calculations to determine if inorganic carbon content would be
a threshold is exceeded. Therefore, we determined on a per-batch basis. In addition to the data reported, we
propose that all phosphoric acid Multiplying the inorganic carbon propose that facilities maintain records
production facilities report. content by the amount (mass) of of inorganic carbon content chemical
For a full discussion of the threshold phosphate rock processed and by the analyses on each batch of phosphate
analysis, please refer to the Phosphoric molecular weight ratio of CO2 to rock and monthly phosphate rock
Acid Production TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR– inorganic carbon (44/12) yields the consumption (by the origin of the
2008–0508–026). For specific estimate of CO2 emissions. This phosphate rock). These records provide
information on costs, including calculated value should be recorded values that are directly used to calculate
unamortized first year capital monthly based on the most recent batch the emissions that are reported and are
expenditures, please refer to section 4 of of phosphate rock received. The necessary to allow determination of
the RIA and the RIA cost appendix. monthly emissions for each phosphoric whether the GHG emissions monitoring
acid process line are then summed to and calculations were done correctly.
3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring A full list of records that must be
Methods obtain the annual emissions to be
included in the report. retained on-site is included in proposed
The methodology for estimating The various approaches to monitoring 40 CFR part 98, subparts A and Z.
process-related emissions from GHG emissions are elaborated in the AA. Pulp and Paper Manufacturing
phosphoric acid production is based on Phosphoric Acid Production TSD (EPA–
the U.S. GHG Inventory method HQ–OAR–2008–0508–026). 1. Definition of the Source Category
discussed further in the Phosphoric The pulp and paper source category
Acid Production TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR– 4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating
Missing Data consists of over 5,000 facilities engaged
2008–0508–026). Most domestic and in the manufacture of pulp, paper, and/
international GHG monitoring The likelihood for missing data is or paperboard products primarily from
guidelines and protocols, such as the low, as businesses closely track their wood material. However, less than 10
2006 IPCC Guidelines do not provide purchase of production inputs. The percent of these facilities are expected
estimation methodologies for process- Phosphoric Acid NSPS (40 CFR part 60, to meet the applicability thresholds of
related emissions from phosphoric acid subpart T) requires continuous this proposed rule. The approximately
production. monitoring of phosphorus-bearing 425 facilities that the proposed rule is
Proposed Option. Under this material (rock) to process. This expected to cover mainly consist of
proposed rule, if you are required to use requirement, along with the fact that the facilities that include pulp, paper and
an existing CEMS to meet the facility would closely monitor paperboard facilities that operate fossil
requirements outlined in proposed 40 production inputs, results in low fuel-fired boilers in addition to
CFR part 98, subpart C, you would be likelihood of missing data. Additionally, operating other sources of GHG
required to use CEMS to estimate CO2 only 3 facilities within the U.S. are not emissions (e.g., biomass boilers, lime
emissions. Where the CEMS capture all vertically integrated with mines and kilns, onsite landfills, and onsite
combustion- and process-related CO2 may lack the necessary equipment to wastewater treatment systems).84
emissions you would be required to measure the inorganic carbon weight Greenhouse gas emissions from the
follow the requirements of proposed 40 percent of the rock. Therefore, no pulp and paper source category are
CFR part 98, subpart C to estimate CO2 missing data procedures would apply to predominantly CO2 with smaller
emissions. Also, refer to proposed 40 CO2 emission estimates from wet- amounts of CH4 and N2O. The pulp and
CFR part 98, subpart C to estimate process phosphoric acid production paper GHG emissions include biomass-
combustion-related CH4 and N2O facilities because inorganic carbon test derived CO2 emissions from using the
emissions. results and monthly production data biomass generated on site as a
If you do not have CEMS that meet should be readily available. Therefore, byproduct (e.g., bark, other wood waste,
the conditions outlined in proposed 40 100 percent data availability would be spent pulping liquor). For example,
CFR part 98, subpart C, we propose that required. kraft pulp and paper facilities are likely
facilities estimate process-related CO2 to generate byproduct biomass fuel
emissions by determining the amount of 5. Selection of Data Reporting
Requirements while the majority of the onsite energy
inorganic carbon input to the process for non-integrated paper facilities and
through measurement of the inorganic We propose that facilities report total 100 percent recycled paper facilities is
carbon content of the phosphate rock annual CO2 emissions from each wet- likely to be generated from fossil fuel-
and multiplying by the amount (mass) process phosphoric acid productionline, fired boilers because these facilities do
of phosphate rock used to manufacture as well as any stationary fuel not generate byproduct biomass fuel.
phosphoric acid. Refer to proposed 40 combustion emissions. In addition, we Table AA–1 of this preamble lists the
CFR part 98, subpart C specifically for propose that facilities report their GHG emission sources that may be
procedures to estimate combustion- annual average phosphate rock
related CH4 and N2O emissions. consumption, percent of inorganic 84 This estimate is based on a survey of pulp and
In order to assess the composition of carbon in the phosphate rock consumed, paper mills conducted by the National Council for
Air and Stream Improvement that operated
the inorganic carbon input, we assume annual phosphoric acid production and stationary combustion units in 2005. See: National
that vertically integrated phosphoric concentration and annual phosphoric Council of Air and Stream Improvement Special
acid production facilities already have acid capacity. These data are used to Report No. 06–07. December 2006.
found at pulp and paper facilities, the methodologies are found in proposed 40
type of GHG emissions that are required CFR part 98.
to be reported, and where the reporting
TABLE AA–1. GHG EMISSION SOURCES AT PULP, PAPER, AND PAPERBOARD FACILITIES
Subpart of 40 CFR part 98 where
Emissions source GHG emissions emissions reporting methodologies
addressed
General Stationary Fuel Combustion ...................................................................... CO2, CH4, N2O, Subpart C.

biomass-CO2.
Makeup Chemicals (CaCO3, Na2CO3) .................................................................... CO2 ........................ Subpart AA.
Onsite industrial landfills ......................................................................................... CH4 ........................ Subpart HH.
Wastewater treatment ............................................................................................. CH4 ........................ Subpart II.
The method presented in this section categories for which methods are 100,000 metric tons CO2e. The threshold
of the preamble is to account for the use presented in proposed 40 CFR part 98. analysis focuses on the most significant
of make-up chemicals (e.g., sodium sources of GHG emissions in the pulp
sulfate, calcium carbonate, sodium and paper industry, specifically
carbonate) that are added into the For the pulp and paper source facilities that make pulp, paper and
recovery loop (e.g., with the spent category, the Agency proposes a GHG paperboard and operate fossil fuel-fired
pulping liquor) at a pulp and paper reporting threshold of 25,000 metric boilers. Therefore, of the 5,000 facilities
facility to replace the small amounts of tons CO2e, which would include the associated with this industry, only 425
sodium and calcium that are lost from vast majority of GHG emissions from the were included in the analysis. Table
the recovery cycle at kraft and soda pulp and paper source category.85 AA–2 of this preamble illustrates that
facilities. When carbonates are added, As described in proposed 40 CFR part the various thresholds do not have a
the carbon in these make-up chemicals, 98, subpart A, biomass-derived CO2 significant effect on the amount of
which can be derived from biomass or emissions should not be taken into emissions that would be covered.
mineral sources, is emitted as CO2 from consideration when determining For a full discussion of the threshold
recovery furnaces and lime kilns. In whether a facility exceeds the 25,000 analysis, please refer to the Pulp and
cases where the carbon is mineral- metric tons CO2e threshold. Paper Manufacturing TSD (EPA–HQ–
based, emissions of CO2 would In evaluating potential thresholds for OAR–2008–0508–027). For specific
contribute to GHG emissions. the pulp and paper source category, we information on costs, including
Affected facilities would be required considered emissions-based thresholds unamortized first year capital
to report total GHG emissions on a of 1,000 metric tons CO2e, 10,000 metric expenditures, please refer to section 4 of
facility-wide basis for all source tons CO2e, 25,000 metric tons CO2e, and the RIA and the RIA cost appendix.
TABLE AA–2. REPORTING THRESHOLDS FOR PULP AND PAPER SECTOR

Total national Total Emissions covered Facilities covered
emissions number of
Threshold level metric tons CO2e (metric tons U.S. Metric tons Percent Number Percent
CO2e) facilities CO2e/yr
1,000 ........................................................................ 57,700,000 425 57,700,000 100 425 100

10,000 ...................................................................... 57,700,000 425 57,700,000 100 425 100
25,000 ...................................................................... 57,700,000 425 57,700,000 100 425 100
100,000 .................................................................... 57,700,000 425 57,527,000 99.7 410 96
3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring Pulp and Paper Manufacturing TSD circumstances at your facility, you may
Methods (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–027). send samples of each carbonate
a. Calculation Methods Selected The proposed method for monitoring consumed to an off-site laboratory for a
emissions from carbonate-based make- chemical analysis of the carbonate
Refer to proposed 40 CFR part 98, weight fraction on a quarterly basis,
subparts C, HH, and II for monitoring up chemicals used at chemical pulp
facilities includes calculating the CO2 consistent with proposed 40 CFR part
methods for general stationary fuel
emissions from the added CaCO3 and 98, subpart U. You could also determine
combustion sources, landfills, and
Na2CO3 using emissions factors the calcination fraction for each of the
industrial wastewater treatment
occurring on-site at pulp and paper provided in the rule. The calculation carbonate-based minerals consumed,
facilities. This section of the preamble assumes that the carbonate based make- using an appropriate test method. Make-
includes monitoring methods for up chemicals added (e.g., limestone) are up chemical usage would be required to
calculating and reporting makeup pure carbonate minerals, and that all of be determined by direct measurement of
chemicals at pulp and paper facilities. the carbon is released to the the quantity of chemical added. The
Additional details on the proposed atmosphere. If you believe that these chemical usage should be quantified
monitoring options are elaborated in the assumptions do not represent separately for each chemical used, and
85 The American Forest and Paper Association include approximately 99 percent of GHG
estimates that the 25,000 metric tons CO2e would emissions from the pulp and paper source category.
the estimate should be in terms of pure and semichemical chemical recovery kraft facility lime kilns should be
CaCO3 and/or Na2CO3. We have combustion units, we propose that addressed. As biogenic process CO2
proposed direct measurement for sources conduct a monthly carbon emissions (i.e., any biogenic CO2
quantifying the amount of makeup content analysis of the spent pulping emissions not associated with the
chemicals, consistent with the liquor for use in calculating the biomass combustion of biomass fuels) are not
estimation of emissions from carbonates CO2 emissions because no default being reported in this rule, we are taking
in the rest of proposed 40 CFR part 98. emissions factors are known to exist for comment on whether an exception
For the monitoring methods detailed these sources. should be made for this unique case,
in proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C We are requesting comment on the consistent with other existing protocols
for general stationary combustion, it appropriateness of today’s proposed as noted above.
should be noted that biogenic CO2 requirements for monthly measurement
emissions from the combustion of of spent pulping liquor HHV (kraft 4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating
biomass fuels are to be reported recovery furnaces) and monthly carbon Missing Data
separately. Furthermore, in referring to content analysis of spent pulping liquor Refer to proposed 40 CFR part 98,
proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C on (sulfite and semichemical chemical subparts C, HH, and II for procedures for
general stationary combustion, we recovery combustion units). We estimating missing data for stationary
would expand upon particular details welcome data and documentation combustion, landfills, and industrial
unique to a pulp and paper facility, regarding the use of potential alternative wastewater treatment occurring on-site
because of the unique uses of biomass methods or default emissions factors. at pulp and paper facilities.
fuels. For the pulp and paper source In addition, regarding the monitoring Proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart AA
category, biomass fuels include, but may methods in proposed 40 CFR part 98, contains missing data procedures for
not be limited to: (1) Unadulterated subpart C for general stationary process emissions. There are no missing
wood, wood residue, and wood combustion, the majority of biomass data procedures for measurements of
products (e.g., trees, tree stumps, tree fuel consumed at pulp and paper mills heat content and carbon content of
limbs, bark, lumber, sawdust, is generated onsite, and thus, as spent pulping liquor. A re-test must be
sanderdust, chips, scraps, slabs, required in proposed 40 CFR part 98, performed if the data from any monthly
millings, wood shavings, paper pellets, subpart C, the use of purchasing records measurements are determined to be
and corrugated container rejects); (2) might not be an option for these mills. invalid. For missing spent pulping
pulp and paper facility wastewater As such, we are taking comment on liquor flow rates, the lesser value of
treatment system sludge; (3) vegetative appropriate details to be reported on either the maximum fuel flow rate for
agricultural and silvicultural materials, volume or mass of biogenic fuel fed into the combustion unit, or the maximum
such as logging residues and bagasse; stationary combustion units. flow rate that the fuel flowmeter can
and (4) liquid biomass-based fuels such b. Other Monitoring Methods measure would be used. For the use of
as biomass-based turpentine and tall oil. Considered makeup chemicals (carbonates), the
Such fuels could be combusted at a pulp substitute data value shall be the best
and paper facility in stationary Lime kilns and calciners used in the available estimate of makeup chemical
combustion units including, but not pulp and paper source category are consumption, based on available data
limited to, boilers, chemical recovery unique and are defined separately from (e.g., past accounting records,
furnaces, and lime kilns. Proposed 40 lime kilns used in the commercial lime production rates).
CFR part 98, subpart C provides details manufacturing industry because the
on the separate reporting of the biogenic source of the carbon in the calcium 5. Selection of Data Reporting
CO2 emissions from these biomass- carbonate entering the kraft lime kiln is Requirements
based fuels, and the calculation biogenic. The CO2 emitted from lime Refer to proposed 40 CFR part 98,
methodologies for any fossil fuels kilns at kraft pulp facilities originates subparts C, HH, and II for reporting
combusted, including when co-fired from two sources: (1) Fossil fuels requirements for stationary combustion,
with biomass. burned in the kiln, and (2) conversion landfills, and industrial wastewater
Where biomass is co-fired with fossil of calcium carbonate (or ‘‘lime mud’’) to treatment occurring on-site at pulp and
fuel, the appropriate methodology as calcium oxide during the chemical paper facilities.
required in proposed 40 CFR part 98, recovery process. We propose that some additional data
subpart C should be used. However, to Although CO2 is also liberated from be reported to assist in verification of
minimize the burden on owners and the CaCO3 burned in the kiln or estimates, checks for reasonableness,
operators of biomass-fired stationary calciner, the carbon released from and other data quality considerations,
combustion equipment, this proposed CaCO3 is biomass carbon that originates including: Annual emission estimates
rule allows biogenic CO2 emissions to in wood and is included in the biogenic presented by calendar quarters
be calculated using default emission CO2 emissions factor for the recovery (including biogenic CO2), total
factors and default HHVs used in the furnace as discussed previously. The consumption of all biomass fuels and
Tier 1 methodology. reporting of the CO2 emissions spent pulping liquor by calendar
Where available, like in the case of associated with the conversion of the quarters, and total annual quantities of
spent pulping liquor, we would require calcium carbonate to lime as biogenic makeup chemicals (carbonates) used
direct analysis of the HHV, rather than CO2 is consistent with the reporting and by carbonate.
allowing the use of a default HHV. This requirements in other accepted
is due to the variability in the HHV of protocols such as DOE 1605(b) and 6. Selection of Records That Must Be
spent pulping liquor across the industry guidance developed for the Retained
and because a number of facilities International Council of the Forest and Refer to proposed 40 CFR part 98,
already perform this analysis on a Paper Association. This approach has subparts C, HH, and II for recordkeeping
monthly basis. However, the proposed been widely accepted by the domestic requirements for stationary combustion,
rule does not propose the use of default and international community, including landfills, and industrial wastewater
GHG emissions factors for spent pulping WRI/WBCSD. The IPCC does not treatment occurring on-site at pulp and
liquor at kraft pulp facilities. For sulfite directly state how CO2 emissions from paper facilities.
In addition to the recordkeeping coke. Other uses of silicon carbide 9 percent (8,526 metric tons CO2e), and
requirements for general stationary fuel include semiconductors, body armor, on-site stationary combustion emissions
combustion sources in proposed 40 CFR and the manufacture of Moissanite, a accounted for less than 1 percent (9,045
part 98, subpart C, we propose that the diamond substitute. The silicon carbide metric tons CO2e).
following additional records be kept to source category is limited to the For additional background
assist in QA/QC, including: GHG production of silicon carbide for information on silicon carbide
emission estimates by calendar quarter abrasive purposes. production, please refer to the Silicon
by unit and facility, monthly CO2 and CH4 are emitted during the Carbide Production TSD (EPA–HQ–
consumption total of all biomass fuels production of silicon carbide. Petroleum OAR–2008–0508–028).
and spent pulping liquor by unit and coke is utilized as a carbon source
facility, monthly analyses of spent during silicon carbide production and 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
pulping liquor HHV or carbon content, approximately 35 percent of the carbon In developing the reporting threshold
monthly and annual steam production is retained within the silicon carbide for silicon carbide production, we
for each biomass unit, and monthly product; the remaining carbon is considered emissions-based thresholds
quantities of makeup chemicals converted to CO2 and CH4. of 1,000 metric tons CO2e, 10,000 metric
(carbonates) used. Silicon carbide process emissions tons CO2e, 25,000 metric tons CO2e and
BB. Silicon Carbide Production totaled 109,271 metric tons CO2e in 100,000 metric tons CO2e. Requiring all
2006 (less than 0.002 percent of the total facilities to report (no threshold) was
1. Definition of the Source Category national GHG emissions). Of the total, also considered. Table BB–1 of this
Silicon carbide (SiC) is primarily an process-related CO2 emissions preamble illustrates the emissions and
industrial abrasive manufactured from accounted for 91 percent (91,700 metric facilities that would be covered under
silica sand or quartz and petroleum tons CO2e), CH4 emissions accounted for these various thresholds.
TABLE BB–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR SILICON CARBIDE PRODUCTION

national Total
Threshold level metric tons CO2e/yr emissions number of Metric tons
(metric tons facilities CO2e/yr
Percent Number Percent
CO2e/yr)
1,000 ........................................................................ 109,271 1 109,271 100 1 100

10,000 ...................................................................... 109,271 1 109,271 100 1 100
25,000 ...................................................................... 109,271 1 109,271 100 1 100
100,000 .................................................................... 109,271 1 109,271 100 1 100
There is no proposed threshold can be summarized in two different estimate combustion-related CH4 and
reporting level for GHG emissions from options based on measuring either N2O emissions.
silicon carbide production facilities. inputs or output of the production Under this proposed rule, if you do
The current estimate of emissions from process. In general, the output or not have CEMS that meet the conditions
the known facility just exceeds the production-based method is less certain, outlined in proposed 40 CFR part 98,
highest threshold considered. Therefore, as it involves multiplying production subpart C or where the CEMS would not
in order to simplify the rule and avoid data by emission and correction factors adequately account for process
the need for the facility to calculate and that are likely default values based on emissions, we propose that facilities use
report whether the facility exceeds the carbon content (i.e., percentage of an input based method to estimate
threshold value, we propose that all petroleum coke input that is carbon) process-related CO2 emissions by
facilities report in this source category. assumptions. In contrast, the input measuring the facility-level petroleum
Requiring all facilities to report captures method is more certain as it generally coke consumed and applying a facility-
100 percent of emissions, and small specific emission factor derived from
involves measuring the consumption of
temporary changes to the facility would analysis of the carbon content in the
reducing agents and calculating the
not affect reporting requirements. coke. In addition, we propose that
carbon contents of those reducing
For a full discussion of the threshold agents, specifically petroleum coke facilities use default emission factors to
analysis, please refer to the Silicon inputs. estimate process-related CH4 emissions.
Carbide Production TSD (EPA–HQ– Refer to proposed 40 CFR part 98,
OAR–2008–0508–028). For specific Proposed Option. Under this subpart C for procedures to estimate
information on costs, including proposed rule, if you are required to use combustion-related CO2, CH4 and N2O
unamortized first year capital an existing CEMS that meets the emissions.
expenditures, please refer to section 4 of requirements outlined in proposed 40 We propose that facilities use an
the RIA and the RIA cost appendix. CFR part 98, subpart C, then you would input-based method to estimate process-
be required to use CEMS to estimate related CO2 emissions by measuring the
3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring CO2 emissions. Where the CEMS
Methods facility-level petroleum coke consumed
capture all combustion- and process- and applying a facility-specific emission
Monitoring of process emissions from related CO2 emissions you would be factor derived from analysis of the
silicon carbide production is addressed required to follow the requirements of carbon content in the coke. Using the
in both domestic and international GHG proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C to emission factor, facilities would
monitoring guidelines and protocols estimate CO2 emissions from the calculate CO2 emissions quarterly and
(the 2006 IPCC Guidelines and U.S. industrial source. Also, refer to aggregate for an annual estimate. In
GHG Inventory). These methodologies proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C to order to estimate carbon content, we
propose that facilities request reports of was considered, but the cost of soda ash produced is used for glass
the carbon content of the petroleum performing testing to determine this production. In the U.S., trona (the raw
coke directly from the supplier or send factor is too burdensome, considering material from which most American
petroleum coke samples out to a that the amount of CH4 emissions soda ash is produced) is mined
certified laboratory for chemical originating from silicon carbide exclusively in Wyoming, where five of
analysis on a quarterly basis. Any production is less than 0.5 percent of the seven U.S. soda ash manufacturing
changes in the measured values would the overall GHG emissions from this facilities are located. Total soda ash
be reflected in a revised emission factor. source category. production in 2006 was 11 million
We assume that data on petroleum The various approaches to monitoring metric tons, an amount consistent with
coke consumption is readily available to GHG emissions are elaborated in the 2005 and 500,000 metric tons more than
facilities. The measurement of Silicon Carbide Production TSD (EPA– was produced in 2002. Due to a surplus
production quantities is common HQ–OAR–2008–0508–028). of soda ash in the market,
practice in the industry and is usually approximately 17 percent of the soda
measured through the use of scales or ash industry’s nameplate capacity was
Missing Data
weigh belts so additional costs to the idled in 2006.
industry are not anticipated. The It is assumed that a facility would be Trona-based production methods are
primary additional burden for facilities readily able to supply data on annual collectively referred to as ‘‘natural
associated with this method is petroleum coke consumption and its production’’ methods. ‘‘Natural
modifying their petroleum coke supplier carbon contents. Therefore, 100 percent production’’ emits CO2 by calcining
contract to include an analysis of the data availability is required. trona. Calcining involves placing
carbon content of each delivery of 5. Selection of Data Reporting crushed trona into a kiln to convert
petroleum coke. Alternatively, a facility Requirements sodium bicarbonate into crude sodium
can send the coke to an off-site carbonate that would later be filtered
laboratory for analysis of the carbon We propose that facilities report the into pure soda ash.
content by the applicable method combined annual CO2 and CH4 National emissions from natural soda
incorporated by reference in proposed emissions from the silicon carbide ash manufacturing were estimated to be
40 CFR 98.7. We consider the additional production processes. In addition, we 3.1 million metric tons CO2e in 2006 or
burden of determining the carbon propose that the following data be less than 0.04 percent of total emissions.
content of the coke raw material reported to assist in verification of These emissions include both process-
minimal compared to the increases in calculations and estimates, checks for related emissions (CO2) and on-site
accuracy expected from the site specific reasonableness, and other data quality stationary combustion emissions (CO2,
emission factors. considerations: Annual silicon carbide CH4, N2O) from six production facilities
We also considered a second method production, annual silicon carbide across the U.S. and Puerto Rico.
of estimating process-related CO2 production capacity, facility-specific Process-related emissions account for
emissions that involves application of CO2 emission factor, and annual 1.6 million metric tons CO2e, or 52
default emission factors based on the operating hours. A full list of data to be percent of the total, while on-site
quantity of coke consumed or total reported is included in proposed 40 stationary combustion emissions
silicon carbide produced. According to CFR part 98, subparts A and BB. account for the remaining 1.5 million
the 2006 IPCC Guidelines, the default 6. Selection of Records That Must Be metric tons CO2e emissions. Soda ash
CO2 emission factors for silicon carbide Retained consumption in the U.S. generated 2.5
production are relatively uncertain million metric tons CO2e in 2006.
because industry scale carbide In addition to the data reported, we Emissions from consumption of soda
production processes differ from the propose that facilities maintain records ash are not addressed in this proposed
stoichiometry of theoretical chemical of quarterly analyses of carbon content rule as they do not occur at the soda ash
reactions. Given the relative uncertainty for consumed coke (averaged to an manufacturing source. Emissions from
of defaults, we decided not to propose annual basis), annual consumption of the use of soda ash would be reported
existing methodologies that relied on petroleum coke, and calculations of by the glass manufacturing industry,
default emission factors or default emission factors. These records hold which consumes the soda ash.
values for carbon content of materials values directly used to calculate
For additional background
because default approaches are reported emissions and are necessary for
information on soda ash manufacturing,
inherently inaccurate for site-specific future verification that GHG emissions
please refer to the Soda Ash
determinations. The use of default monitoring and calculations were done
Manufacturing TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–
values is more appropriate for sector correctly. A full list of records that must
2008–0508–029).
wide or national total estimates from be maintained onsite is included in
aggregated activity data than for proposed 40 CFR part 98, subparts A 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
determining emissions from specific and BB. In developing the threshold for soda
facilities. CC. Soda Ash Manufacturing ash manufacturing, we considered
We propose that facilities estimate emissions-based thresholds of 1,000
process-related CH4 emissions by using 1. Definition of the Source Category metric tons CO2e, 10,000 metric tons
a default emission factor of 10.2 kg CH4 Soda ash (sodium carbonate, Na2CO3) CO2e, 25,000 metric tons CO2e, and
per metric ton of petroleum coke is a raw material utilized in numerous 100,000 metric tons CO2e per year.
consumed during silicon carbide industries including glass production, Table CC–1 of this preamble illustrates
production. This method coincides with pulp and paper production, and soap the emissions and facilities that would
the IPCC Tier 1 method. Direct production. According to the USGS, the be covered under these various
measurement of a CH4 emission factor majority of the 11 million metric tons of thresholds.
TABLE CC–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR SODA ASH MANUFACTURING

Total
emissions
Threshold level metric tons CO2e/yr number of
metric tons Metric tons
facilities Percent Number Percent
CO2e/yr CO2e/yr
1,000 ........................................................................ 3,121,438 5 3,121,438 100 5 100

10,000 ...................................................................... 3,121,438 5 3,121,438 100 5 100
25,000 ...................................................................... 3,121,438 5 3,121,438 100 5 100
100,000 .................................................................... 3,121,438 5 3,121,438 100 5 100
Facility-level emissions estimates Tier 2 method and consistent with the averages from daily tests. This
based on known plant capacities suggest DOE 1605(b) ‘‘A’’ rated approach. methodology was chosen because it
that all known facilities exceed the Option 3: Direct measurement of would be more accurate than methods
highest (100,000 metric tons CO2e) emissions using CEMS. using default factors for fractional
threshold examined. Two facilities were Proposed Option. Under this purity.
excluded from this analysis based on proposed rule, if you are required to use We decided against applying a default
available information (one has not been an existing CEMS to meet the emission factor and a default adjustment
operating since 2004 and the second requirements outlined in proposed 40 factor of 0.9 to either the total amount
recycles or utilizes CO2 emissions as CFR part 98, subpart C, you would be of trona consumed or soda ash
part of the process, resulting in limited required to use CEMS to estimate CO2 produced. According to IPCC, the
fugitive emissions). Even if sources are emissions. Where the CEMS capture all stoichiometric ratio used in the default
not operating at full capacity, all or most combustion- and process-related CO2 emission factor equation is an exact
of them would still be expected to emissions, you would be required to number and assumes 100 percent purity
exceed the 25,000 metric ton threshold. follow requirements of proposed 40 CFR of the input or output and the
We propose that all facilities report. part 98, subpart C to estimate CO2 uncertainty of the default emission
Requiring all facilities to report would emissions. Also, refer to proposed 40 factor is negligible. However, simple
simplify the proposed rule, and ensure CFR part 98, subpart C to estimate application of default emission and
that 100 percent of the emissions from combustion-related CH4 and N2O adjustment factors would not take into
this industry are reported. emissions. account the actual fractional purities of
For a full discussion of the threshold Under this proposed rule, if you do either the trona input or soda ash
analysis, please refer to the Soda Ash not have CEMS that meet the conditions output.
Manufacturing TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR– outlined in proposed 40 CFR part 98, We also decided against proposing the
2008–0508–029). For specific subpart C, or where the CEMS would second option to determine an annual
information on costs, including not adequately account for process site-specific emission factor. The stack
unamortized first year capital emissions, we propose that facilities from the calciner (kiln) emits CO2
expenditures, please refer to section 4 of estimate process-related CO2 emissions emissions from both combustion- and
the RIA and the RIA cost appendix. using a modified Option 1. Refer to process-related sources. An annual stack
3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C for test would not capture the variability in
Methods procedures to estimate combustion- stationary combustion emissions
Many domestic and international related CO2, CH4 and N2O emissions. associated with consumption of various
GHG monitoring guidelines and The proposed monitoring method types of fuels, so would not significantly
protocols include methodologies for requires facilities to use default reduce the uncertainty for developing
estimating process-related emissions stoichiometric emission factors (either annual estimates of CO2 emissions.
from soda ash manufacturing (e.g., the 0.097 for trona consumed (ratio of ton While not improving emissions
2006 IPCC Guidelines, DOE 1605(b)). of CO2 emitted for each ton of trona) or estimates significantly, annual stack
These methodologies coalesce around 0.138 for soda ash produced (ratio of ton testing would be burdensome to
three different options: of CO2 emitted for each ton of natural industry. We have concluded that
Option 1: Default emission factors soda ash produced)) and to measure the measuring fractional purity, as
would be applied to the amount of trona fractional purity of the trona or soda described in the proposed modified
consumed or soda ash produced. This ash. These factors are then applied to Option 1 approach, would improve
method would also involve applying an the estimated quantity of raw material emissions estimates, with a minimal
adjustment factor to the default input or the amount of soda ash output. cost burden.
emission factor to account for fractional Raw material input and output The third option we considered, but
purity of the trona consumed or soda quantities are assumed to be readily did not select as the proposed option,
ash produced. A default adjustment available to facilities. In order to assess was continuous direct measurement of
factor of 0.9 could be applied if country the fractional purity of trona or soda ash emissions from soda ash manufacturing.
specific or plant specific information is (as determined by the level of the This option is consistent with the 2006
not available. This option is consistent inorganic carbon present), we propose IPCC Guidelines Tier 3 method. Use of
with IPCC Tier 2 methods and 1605(b)’s that facilities test samples of trona using a CO2 CEMS would eliminate the need
‘‘A’’ rated approach. in-house TOC analyzers or test samples for further periodic review because this
Option 2: Develop a site-specific of soda ash for inorganic carbon method would account for the
emission factor (determined by an expressed as total alkalinity using variability in GHG emissions due to
annual stack test). This method would applicable test methods. We are changes in the process or operation over
account for the fractional purity of the assuming that soda ash facilities are time. While this method does tend to
trona consumed or soda ash produced. conducting daily tests of fractional provide the most accurate CO2
This approach is consistent with IPCC’s purity and can develop monthly emissions measurements and can
measure both the combustion- and outliers. A full list of data that would be In terms of both absolute and carbon-
process-related CO2 emissions, it is reported is included in proposed 40 weighted emissions, PFC emissions
likely the costliest of all the monitoring CFR part 98, subparts A and CC. from electrical equipment are generally
methods. Installation of CEMS would believed to be much smaller than SF6
require significant additional burden to Retained emissions from electrical equipment;
facilities given that few soda ash however, there may be some exceptions
facilities currently have CO2 CEMS. We propose that facilities keep to this pattern, according to the 2006
The various options of monitoring information on monthly production of IPCC Guidelines.
GHG emissions, as well as the domestic soda ash (metric tons), monthly According to the 2008 U.S. Inventory,
and international GHG monitoring consumption of trona (metric tons), and
total U.S. estimated emissions of SF6
guidelines and protocols researched, are daily fractional purity (i.e., inorganic
from an estimated 1,364 electric power
elaborated in the Soda Ash carbon content) of the trona or soda ash.
system utilities 86 were 12.4 million
Manufacturing TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR– A full list of records that must be
metric tons CO2e in 2006. We do not
2008–0508–029). retained onsite is included in the
have an estimate of PFC emissions.
proposed rule.
4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating This source category comprises
Missing Data DD. Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) From electric power transmission and
Electrical Equipment distribution systems that operate gas-
We propose that no missing data
procedures would apply to estimating 1. Definition of the Source Category insulated substations, circuit breakers,
CO2 process emissions because the and other switchgear, or power
The largest use of SF6, both in the transformers containing sulfur-
calculations are based on production, or U.S. and internationally, is as an
trona consumption, which are closely hexafluoride (SF6) or PFCs.
electrical insulator and interrupter in
tracked production inputs and outputs. equipment that transmits and 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
Given that the fractional purity would distributes electricity. The gas has been
have to be tested on a daily basis, if a employed by the electric power industry We propose to require electric power
value is missing the test should be in the U.S. since the 1950s because of systems to report their SF6 and PFC
repeated. Therefore, 100 percent data its dielectric strength and arc-quenching emissions if the total nameplate
availability would be required. characteristics. It is used in gas- capacity of their SF6-containing
insulated substations, circuit breakers, equipment exceeds 17,820 lbs of SF6.
5. Selection of Data Reporting This threshold is equivalent to an
Requirements other switchgear, and gas-insulated
lines. SF6 has replaced flammable emissions threshold of 25,000 metric
We propose that reported data include insulating oils in many applications and tons CO2e, and was developed using
annual CO2 process emissions from each allows for more compact substations in historical (1999) data from utilities that
soda ash manufacturing line, and the dense urban areas. Currently, there are participate in EPA’s SF6 Emission
number of soda ash manufacturing no available substitutes for SF6 in this Reduction Partnership for Electric
lines, as well as any stationary fuel application. For further information, see Power Systems (Partnership).
combustion emissions. In addition, we the SF6 from Electrical Equipment TSD In addition, we considered emission-
propose that facilities report the (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–030). based threshold options of 1,000 metric
following data for each soda ash Fugitive emissions of SF6 can escape tons CO2e; 10,000 metric tons CO2e; and
manufacturing line: Annual soda ash from gas-insulated substations and 100,000 metric tons CO2e. Nameplate
production, annual soda ash production switch gear through seals, especially capacity thresholds of 713; 7,128; and
capacity, annual trona quantity from older equipment. The gas can also 71,280 lbs of SF6 for all utilities were
consumed, fractional purity (i.e., be released during equipment also considered, corresponding to the
inorganic carbon content) of the trona or manufacturing, installation, servicing, emission threshold options of 1,000;
soda ash, and number of operating and disposal. 10,000; and 100,000 metric tons CO2e,
hours in the calendar year. These PFCs are sometimes used as respectively. Summaries of the
additional data, most of which are used dielectrics and heat transfer fluids in threshold options (capacity-based and
as a basis for calculating emissions, are power transformers. PFCs are also used emissions-based) and the number of
needed to understand the emissions for retrofitting CFC–113 cooled utilities and emissions falling above
data, verify the reasonableness of the transformers. One PFC used in this each threshold are presented in Tables
reported emissions, and identify application is perfluorohexane (C6F14). DD–1 and DD–2 of this preamble.
TABLE DD–1. OPTIONS FOR CAPACITY-BASED THRESHOLDS FOR ELECTRIC POWER SYSTEMS
Nameplate capacity threshold for all Total Emissions covered Facilities covered
Total number
utilities national of
(lbs SF6) emissions facilities MMTCO2e/yr Percent Number Percent
MMTCO2e/yr
713 ........................................................... 12.4 1,364 12.19 98 578 42

7,128 ........................................................ 12.4 1,364 10.96 88 183 13
17,820 ...................................................... 12.4 1,364 10.32 83 141 10
71,280 ...................................................... 12.4 1,364 5.95 48 35 3
86 The estimated total number of electric power zero transmission miles. The estimated total is consistent with the U.S. inventory methodology,
system (EPS) utilities includes all companies number of EPS utilities that emit SF6 likely in which only non-partner utilities with non-zero
participating in the SF6 Emission Reduction underestimates the population, as some utilities transmission miles and partner utilities are
Partnership for Electric Power Systems and the may own high-voltage equipment yet not own assumed to emit SF6.
number includes non-partner utilities with non- transmission miles. However, the estimated number
TABLE DD–2. OPTIONS FOR EMISSIONS-BASED THRESHOLDS FOR ELECTRIC POWER SYSTEMS
Total
national
emissions facilities MMTCO2e/yr Percent Number Percent
MMTCO2e/yr
1,000 ........................................................ 12.4 1,364 12.20 98 564 41

10,000 ...................................................... 12.4 1,364 10.87 88 158 12
25,000 ...................................................... 12.4 1,364 10.11 82 111 8
100,000 .................................................... 12.4 1,364 5.84 47 27 2
We selected a nameplate capacity Additional information supporting emitted to the atmosphere. The
threshold equivalent to the 25,000 the selection of the threshold can be emissions of SF6 and PFC would be
metric tons CO2e emissions threshold found in the SF6 from Electrical estimated and reported separately.
level. A capacity-based threshold was Equipment TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– The following equation describes the
selected because it permits utilities to 0508–030). For specific information on proposed utility-level mass-balance
quickly determine whether they are costs, including unamortized first year approach:
covered. There have been many mergers capital expenditures, please refer to User Emissions = Decrease in SF6
and acquisitions in the electric power section 4 of the RIA and the RIA cost Inventory + Acquisitions of
industry and nameplate capacity is appendix. SF6¥Disbursements of SF6¥Net
generally a known variable as a result of 3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring Increase in Total Nameplate Capacity of
these transactions. Methods Equipment
The proposed threshold is consistent
In developing the proposed approach, Where:
with the threshold for other source
categories. Based on information from we reviewed the 2006 IPCC Guidelines, Decrease in SF6 Inventory is SF6 stored in
the SF6 Emissions Reduction containers (but not in equipment) at the
the Partnership and from the Universal beginning of the year minus SF6 stored in
Database Interface Directory of Electric Partnership for Electric Power Systems,
the U.S. GHG Inventory, DOE 1605(b), containers (but not in equipment) at the end
Power Producers and Distributors, we of the year.
estimate that the nameplate capacity EPA’s Climate Leaders Program, and
Acquisitions of SF6 is SF6 purchased from
threshold covers only a small TCR. In the IPCC Guidelines, Tiers 1 chemical producers or distributors in bulk +
percentage of total utilities (10 percent and 2 are based on default SF6 and PFC SF6 purchased from equipment
or 141 utilities), while covering the emission factors, but Tier 3 is based on manufacturers or distributors with or inside
majority of annual emissions using utility-specific information to of equipment + SF6 returned to site after off-
(approximately 83 percent). estimate emissions of both SF6 and PFC site recycling.
using a mass-balance analysis. Disbursements of SF 6 is SF6 in bulk and
Other Options Considered. We contained in equipment that is sold to other
The proposed monitoring methods for
considered setting a threshold based on entities + SF6 returned to suppliers + SF6 sent
calculating SF6 and PFC emissions from
the length of the transmission lines, electric power systems are similar to the off-site for recycling + SF6 sent to destruction
defined as the miles of lines carrying methodologies described in EPA’s SF6 facilities.
voltages above 34.5 kV, owned by Emission Reduction Partnership for Net Increase in Total Nameplate Capacity
electric power systems. The of Equipment is the Nameplate capacity of
Electric Power Systems (Partnership) new equipment minus Nameplate capacity of
transmission-mile threshold equivalent Inventory Reporting Protocol and Form
to 25,000 metric tons CO2e is 1,186 retiring equipment. (Note that Nameplate
and the 2006 IPCC Guidelines Tier 3 capacity refers to the full and proper charge
miles. The fractions of utilities and methods for emissions from electrical of equipment rather than to the actual charge,
emissions covered by this threshold equipment. In general, these protocols which may reflect leakage.)
would be almost identical to those and guidance all support using a mass-
covered by the nameplate-capacity The same method is being proposed
balance approach as the most accurate
threshold. alternative to estimate emissions. to estimate emissions of PFCs from
We decided not to propose the We propose that you report all SF6 power transformers.
transmission-mile threshold because the and PFC emissions, including those Other Options Considered. We also
relationship between emissions and from equipment installation, equipment considered the IPCC Tier 1 and the IPCC
transmission miles, while strong, is not use, and equipment decommissioning Tier 2 methods for calculating and
as strong as that between emissions and and disposal. This requirement would reporting SF6 and PFC emissions, but
nameplate capacity. On the one hand, apply only to systems where the total did not choose them for several reasons.
some utilities have far larger nameplate nameplate capacity of their SF6- Although the IPCC Tier 1 method is
capacities and emissions than would be containing equipment exceeds 17,820 simpler, the default emission factors
expected based on their transmission lbs of SF6. The Tier 3 approach is being have large uncertainty due to variability
miles. This is the case for some urban proposed because it is the most accurate associated with handling and
utilities that have large volumes of SF6 and it is feasible for all systems to management practices, age of
in gas-insulated switchgear. On the conduct the mass balance analysis for equipment, mix of equipment, and other
other hand, some utilities have lower SF6 and PFC using readily available similar factors. Utilities participating in
nameplate capacities and emissions information. EPA’s Partnership have reduced their
than would be expected based on their The mass-balance approach works by emission factors to less than Tier 1
transmission miles, because most of tracking and systematically accounting default values. Less than 10 percent of
their transmission lines use lower for all facility uses of SF6 and PFC U.S. utilities participate in this program;
voltages than average and therefore during the reporting year. The quantities however, these utilities represent close
typically use less SF6 than average as of SF6 and PFC that cannot be to 40 percent of the U.S. grid, so the
well. accounted for are assumed to have been IPCC Tier 1 emission factors are not
accurate for a large percentage of the These data would be submitted The chloride process is based on two
U.S. source category. because they are the minimum data that chemical reactions. Petroleum coke (C)
IPCC Tier 2 methods use country- are needed to understand and reproduce is oxidized as the reducing agent in the
specific emission factors, but the Partner the emission calculations that are the first reaction in the presence of chlorine
utilities have demonstrated by basis of the reported emissions. and crystallized iron titanium oxide
calculating their own utility-level Transmission miles would be included (FeTiO3) to form and emit CO2. A
emission rates that large variability in the reported data so that the special grade of petroleum coke, known
exists in utility-level emission rates reasonableness of the reported as calcined petroleum coke, is a highly
across the nation (i.e., emission rates emissions could be quickly checked electrically conductive carbon (fixed
range from less than one percent of a using default emission factors. carbon content >98 percent) and is used
utility’s SF6 inventory to greater than 35 in several manufacturing processes
percent). As a result, we are not including titanium dioxide (in the
Retained
proposing the IPCC Tier 2 method. chloride process), aluminum, graphite,
We propose that electric power steel, and other carbon consuming
systems be required to keep records industries. For the purposes of this
Missing Data
documenting (1) their adherence to the rulemaking effort EPA is assuming the
It is expected that utilities should QA/QC requirements specified in the carbon content factor for calcined
have 100 percent of the data needed to proposed rule, and (2) the data that petroleum coke is 100 percent or a
perform the mass balance calculations would be included in their emission multiplier of 1. Therefore, no site-
for both SF6 and PFCs. Partner utilities reports, as specified above. The QA/QC specific factor needs to be determined.
missing inputs to the mass-balance requirements records include check-out The titanium tetrachloride (TiCl4)
approach have estimated emissions sheets and weigh-in procedures for produced through this first reaction is
using other methods, such as assuming cylinders, residual gas amounts in oxidized with oxygen at about 1,000 °C,
that all purchased SF6 is emitted. cylinders sent back to suppliers, and calcinated in a second reaction to
However, this method over-estimates invoices for gas and equipment remove residual chlorine and any
emissions, and we do not recommend purchases or sales, and records of hydrochloric acid that may have formed
this method of estimation in the absence equipment nameplate capacity. The in the reaction producing titanium
of more complete data. The use of the records that are being proposed are the dioxide (TiO2).
mass-balance approach requires correct minimum needed to reproduce and National emissions from titanium
records for all inputs. confirm emission calculations. dioxide production were estimated to be
3.6 million metric tons CO2e in 2006.
5. Selection of Data Reporting EE. Titanium Dioxide Production These emissions include process-related
Requirements
1. Definition of the Source Category (CO2) and on-site stationary combustion
We propose annual reporting for emissions (CO2, CH4, and N2O) from
facilities in the electric power systems Titanium dioxide is a metal oxide eight production facilities. Process-
industry. Each facility would report all commonly used as a white pigment in related emissions from titanium dioxide
SF6 and PFC emissions, including those paint manufacturing, paper, plastics, production were 1.87 million metric
from equipment installation, equipment rubber, ceramics, fabrics, floor covering, tons CO2e or 47 percent of the total,
use, and equipment decommissioning printing ink, and other applications. while on-site combustion emissions
and disposal. However, the emissions The majority of TiO2 production is for account for the remaining 1.8 million
would not need to be broken down and the manufacturing of white paint. metric tons CO2e emissions in 2006.
reported separately for installation, use National production of TiO2 in 2006 For additional background
or disposal. Along with their emissions, was approximately 1,400,000 metric information on titanium dioxide
utilities would be required to submit the tons. production, please refer to the Titanium
following supplemental data, nameplate Titanium dioxide is produced through Dioxide Production TSD (EPA–HQ–
capacity (existing as of the beginning of two processes: The chloride process and OAR–2008–0508–031).
the year, new during the year, and the sulfate process. According to USGS,
retired during the year), transmission most facilities in the U.S. employ the 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
miles, SF6 and PFC sales and purchases, chloride process. Total U.S. production In developing the threshold for
SF6 and PFC sent off-site for destruction of titanium dioxide pigment through the titanium dioxide production, we
or to be recycled, SF6 and PFC returned chloride process was approximately 1.4 considered an emissions-based
from offsite after recycling, SF6 and PFC metric tons in 2006, a 7 percent increase threshold of 1,000 metric tons CO2e,
stored in containers at the beginning compared to 2005. The chloride process 10,000 metric tons CO2e, 25,000 metric
and end of the year, SF6 and PFC with emits process-related CO2 through the tons CO2e, and 100,000 metric tons
or inside new equipment purchased in use of petroleum coke and chlorine as CO2e. Table EE–1 of this preamble
the year, SF6 and PFC with or inside raw materials, while the sulfate process illustrates the emissions and facilities
equipment sold to other entities and SF6 does not emit any significant process- that would be covered under these
and PFC returned to suppliers. related GHGs. various thresholds.
TABLE EE–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR TITANIUM DIOXIDE PRODUCTION

Total
Total national
emissions Metric tons
CO2e/yr
1,000 ........................................................................ 3,685,777 8 3,685,777 100 8 100

10,000 ...................................................................... 3,685,777 8 3,685,777 100 8 100
25,000 ...................................................................... 3,685,777 8 3,685,777 100 8 100
TABLE EE–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR TITANIUM DIOXIDE PRODUCTION—Continued

Total
Total national
emissions Metric tons
CO2e/yr
100,000 .................................................................... 3,685,777 8 3,628,054 98 7 88
At the threshold levels of 1,000 metric emissions you would be required to consumption of reducing agents are
tons CO2e, 10,000 metric tons CO2e, and follow the calculation procedures, more appropriate for reflecting
25,000 metric tons CO2e, all facilities monitoring and QA/QC methods, differences in process design and
exceed the threshold, therefore covering missing data procedures, reporting operation. According to the 2006 IPCC
100 percent of total emissions. At the requirements, and recordkeeping Guidelines, the uncertainty associated
100,000 metric tons CO2e level, one requirements of proposed 40 CFR part with the proposed approach is much
facility would not exceed the threshold 98, subpart C to estimate CO2 emissions. lower given that facilities closely track
and 98 percent of emissions would be Also, refer to proposed 40 CFR part 98, consumption of the calcined petroleum
covered. In order to simplify the rule, subpart C to estimate combustion- coke (accurate within 2 percent),
and avoid the need for the source to related CH4 and N2O emissions. whereas the uncertainty associated with
calculate and report whether the facility Under this proposed rule, if you do the default emission factor is
exceeds threshold value, we are not have CEMS that meet the conditions approximately 15 percent.
proposing that all titanium dioxide outlined in proposed 40 CFR part 98, The various approaches to monitoring
production facilities report. Including subpart C, we propose that facilities use GHG emissions are elaborated in the
all facilities simplifies the rule and the second option discussed above to Titanium Dioxide Production TSD
ensures 100 percent coverage without estimate process-related CO2 emissions. (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–031).
significantly increasing the number of Refer to proposed 40 CFR part 98,
subpart C specifically for procedures to 4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating
affected facilities expected to report
estimate combustion-related CO2, CH4 Missing Data
relative to the 25,000 metric ton
threshold. and N2O emissions. It is assumed that a facility would be
For a full discussion of the threshold Under this approach the total amount able to supply data on annual calcined
analysis, please refer to the Titanium of calcined petroleum coke consumed petroleum coke consumption data.
Dioxide Production TSD (EPA–HQ– would be assumed to be directly Therefore, 100 percent data availability
OAR–2008–0508–031). For specific converted into CO2 emissions. The is required for all parameters.
information on costs, including amount of calcined petroleum coke can
be obtained from facility records, as that 5. Selection of Data Reporting
unamortized first year capital
data would be readily available. The Requirements
expenditures, please refer to section 4 of
the RIA and the RIA cost appendix. carbon oxidation factor for the calcined We propose that facilities submit
petroleum coke is assumed to be 100 process-related CO2 emissions on an
3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring percent, because any amount that is not annual basis, as well as any stationary
Methods oxidized is an insignificant amount. For fuel combustion emissions. In addition
Many domestic and international the purposes of this rulemaking effort we propose that facilities report the
GHG monitoring guidelines and EPA is assuming the carbon oxidation following additional data used as the
protocols include methodologies for factor for calcined petroleum coke, is basis of the calculations to assist in
estimating process-related emissions equal to 100/100 or 1. Therefore, no site- verification of estimates, checks for
from titanium dioxide production (e.g., specific factor needs to be determined. reasonableness, and other data quality
the 2006 IPCC Guidelines, U.S. GHG We decided not to propose the option considerations. The data includes:
Inventory, Australian Government’s to use continuous direct measurement annual production of titanium dioxide,
National Greenhouse and Energy because it would not lead to annual amount of calcined petroleum
Reporting System). These methods significantly reduced uncertainty in the coke consumed, and number of
coalesce around two different options. emissions estimate over the proposed operating hours in the calendar year.
Option 1. CO2 emissions are estimated option. Furthermore, the cost impact of Facilities are not required to submit
by applying a default emission factor to requiring the installation of CEMS is carbon oxidation factor for calcined
annual facility level titanium dioxide high in comparison to the relatively low petroleum coke; this value is assumed to
production. amount of emissions that would be be 100 percent, as any amount that is
Option 2. CO2 emissions are estimated quantified from the titanium production not oxidized is assumed to be an
based on the facility-specific quantity of sector. insignificant amount. A full list of data
reducing agents or calcined petroleum We decided not to propose the option to be reported is included in proposed
coke consumed. to apply default emission factors to 40 CFR part 98, subparts A and EE.
Option 3. Direct measurement of titanium dioxide production to quantify
emissions using CEMS. process-related emissions. Although 6. Selection of Records That Must Be
Proposed Option. Under this default emissions factors have been Retained
proposed rule, if you are required to use developed for quantifying process- In addition to the data reported, we
an existing CEMS to meet the related emissions from titanium dioxide propose that facilities maintain records
requirements outlined in proposed 40 production, the use of these default of monthly production of titanium
CFR part 98, subpart C, you would be values is more appropriate for sector dioxide and monthly amounts of
required to use CEMS to estimate CO2 wide or national total estimates than for calcined petroleum coke consumed.
emissions. Where the CEMS capture all determining emissions from a specific These records hold values that are
combustion- and process-related CO2 plant. Estimates based on site-specific directly used to calculate the emissions
that are reported and are necessary to through pipelines (including natural gas destruction of coal mine gas CH4, where
allow determination of whether GHG pipelines) for offsite combustion, and the gas is not a fuel input for energy
emissions monitoring and calculations CH4 that is collected for any other onsite generation or use. Due to difficulties
were done correctly. They also are or offsite use as a fuel. associated with obtaining accurate
needed to understand the emissions At surface mines, CH4 in the coal measurements from surface mines, post-
data and verify the reasonableness of the seams is directly exposed to the mining activities, and abandoned
reported emissions and identify atmosphere. (closed) mines, and in some cases,
potential outliers. Post coal mining activities release difficulties in identifying owners of
A full list of records that must be emissions as coal continues to emit CH4 these sources, we propose to exclude
retained onsite is included in proposed as it is stored in piles, processed, and fugitive CH4 emissions from these
40 CFR part 98, subparts A and EE. transported. sources from this rule. These sources
At abandoned (closed) underground could still surpass the threshold for
FF. Underground Coal Mines
coal mines, CH4 from the coal seam and stationary fuel combustion activities
1. Definition of the Source Category mined-out area may vent to the and therefore be required to report
Coal mining can produce significant atmosphere through fissures in rock stationary fuel combustion-related
amounts of CH4 from the following areas strata or through incompletely sealed emissions.
and activities: Active underground coal boreholes. It is possible to recover and Although fugitive CO2 may be emitted
mines, surface coal mines, post-coal use the CH4 stored in abandoned coal from coal seams, it is not typically a
mining activities and abandoned mines. significant source of emissions from
underground coal mines. Total U.S. CH4 emissions from active
U.S. coal seams compared to CH4.
An active underground coal mine is a mining operations in 2006 were
Furthermore, methodologies are not
mine at which coal is produced by estimated to be 58.5 million metric tons
widely available to measure these
tunneling into the earth to a subsurface CO2e from these sources. Of this, active
emissions, and therefore they are not
coal seam, which is then mined with underground mines accounted for 61
proposed for inclusion in this rule.
equipment such as cutting machines, percent of emissions, or 35.9 million
extracted and transported to the surface. metric tons CO2e, surface mines For additional background
In underground mines, CH4 is released accounted for 24 percent of emissions, information on coal mining, please refer
from the coal and surrounding rock or 14.0 million metric tons CO2e, and to the Underground Coal Mines TSD
strata due to mining activities, and can post-mining emissions accounted for 15 (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–032).
create an explosive hazard. Ventilation percent, or 8.6 million metric tons CO2e. 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
systems dilute in-mine concentrations CH4 emissions from abandoned (closed)
to within safe limits, and exhaust CH4 underground coal mines were estimated In developing the threshold for active
to the atmosphere. to contribute another 5.4 million metric underground coal mines, we considered
Mines that produce large amounts of tons CO2e. On-site stationary fuel emissions-based thresholds of 1,000
CH4 also rely on degasification (or combustion emissions at coal mining metric tons CO2e, 10,000 metric tons
‘‘drainage’’) systems to remove CH4 from operations accounted for an estimated CO2e, 25,000 metric tons CO2e and
the coal seam in advance of, during, or 9.0 million metric tons CO2e emissions 100,000 metric tons CO2e for total onsite
after mining, producing high- in 2006. Proposed requirements for emissions from stationary fuel
concentration CH4 gas. stationary fuel combustion emissions combustion, ventilation, and
CH4 from degasification and are set forth in proposed 40 CFR part 98, degasification. We also considered
ventilation systems can be liberated to subpart C. requiring all coal mines for which CH4
the atmosphere or destroyed. Destroyed We propose to require reporting of emissions from the ventilation system
CH4 includes, but is not limited to, CH4 emissions from ventilation and are sampled quarterly by the MSHA to
combusted by flaring, CH4 destroyed by degasification systems at active report under this proposal. Table FF–1
thermal oxidation, CH4 combusted for underground mines in this rule. This of this preamble illustrates the
use in onsite energy or heat production includes the fugitive CH4 from these emissions and facilities that would be
technologies, CH4 that is conveyed systems and also CO2 emissions from covered under these various thresholds.
TABLE FF–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR COAL MINING AT ACTIVE UNDERGROUND COAL MINES
Threshold level metric tons CO2e/yr (metric tons of facilities Metric tons Percent Facilities Percent
CO2e) CO2e/yr
MSHA reporting ....................................... 39,520,000 612 33,945,956 86 128 21

1,000 ........................................................ 39,520,000 612 33,945,446 86 125 20
10,000 ...................................................... 39,520,000 612 33,926,526 86 122 20
25,000 ...................................................... 39,520,000 612 33,536,385 85 100 16
100,000 .................................................... 39,520,000 612 31,054,856 79 53 9
We propose that all active and flow at mines emitting more than MSHA regulations. The MSHA
underground coal mines for which CH4 100,000 cf CH4 per day. We selected this threshold for reporting of 100,000 cf
from the ventilation system is sampled threshold because subjecting CH4 per day covers approximately 94
quarterly by MSHA (or on a more underground mine operators to a new percent of the CH4 emitted from
frequent basis), are required to report emissions-based threshold is underground coal mine ventilation
under this rule. MSHA conducts unnecessarily burdensome, as many of systems and about 86 percent of total
quarterly testing of CH4 concentration these mines are already subject to emissions from underground mining
(including stationary fuel combustion procedures,87 which were developed to consideration any variability in
emissions at mine sites, as shown in ensure adherence to safety standards, is emissions from mining operations that
Table FF–1 of this preamble). appropriate and sufficiently accurate for may not be represented in the quarterly
For additional background a GHG emissions reporting program. sampling. Moreover, since such devices
information on the thresholds for coal Further, we are interested in viewpoints are already used within the mine to
mining, please refer to the Underground on whether quarterly sampling is assess safety conditions, mine operator
Coal Mines TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– sufficient to account for potential personnel are familiar with their
0508–032). For specific information on fluctuations in emissions over smaller operation. The disadvantage in
costs, including unamortized first year time increments (e.g., daily) from the requiring CEMS installation would be
capital expenditures, please refer to mine. For more information on the the larger costs associated with
section 4 of the RIA and the RIA cost MSHA sampling procedures, please purchasing and maintaining these
appendix. refer to the Underground Coal Mines devices. We seek comment on the
TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–032). accuracy and cost of monitoring
3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring For all ventilation systems with CH4
Methods ventilation emissions with CEMS.
destruction, CH4 destruction would be Finally, we decided not to propose
Many domestic and international monitored through direct measurement Option 1, which applies default
GHG monitoring guidelines and of CH4 flow to combustion devices with emission factors to coal production. We
protocols include methodologies for continuous flow monitoring systems. decided against the use of the default
estimating CH4 emissions from coal The resulting CO2 emissions would be CH4 emission factors because their
mining (e.g., the 2006 IPCC Guidelines, calculated from these monitored values. application is more appropriate for GHG
U.S. GHG Inventory, DOE 1605(b), and If CH4 from ventilation systems is estimates from aggregated process
Australia’s National Greenhouse Gas destroyed, such a system would have information on a sector-wide or national
and Energy Reporting System). These sufficient continuous monitoring basis than for determining GHG
methodologies coalesce into three devices associated with it that such emissions from specific mines.
different approaches. required monitoring would not propose Proposed Option for Degasification.
Option 1. Engineering approaches, any additional burden.
We propose that all coal mine operators
whereby default emission factors would We considered requiring mines to
subject to this rule that deploy
be applied to total annual coal monitor ventilation CH4 concentrations
by daily sampling, in place of quarterly degasification systems in underground
production (for ventilation systems), or
sampling, for this rule. Many mines mines install continuous monitors for
emission factors associated with the
sample CH4 daily from ventilation CH4 content and flowrates on all
system type (for degasification systems)
systems using handheld CH4 analyzers. degasification wells or degasification
to estimate fugitive emissions.
Option 2. Periodic sampling of CH4. The primary advantages of this option vent holes, and that all CH4 liberated
Quarterly or more frequent samples are that many mines already take these and CH4 destroyed from these systems
could be taken in order to develop a measurements and this would therefore be reported (Option 3). For all systems
site-specific emission factor. not impose an additional monitoring with CH4 destruction, CH4 destruction
Option 3. Use of CEMS. burden, and that daily measurements of would be monitored through direct
Proposed Option for Liberated CH4 concentration and ventilation shaft measurement of CH4 flow to combustion
Ventilation CH4. We propose Option 2, flowrates could allow for more accurate devices with continuous monitoring
quarterly sampling of ventilation air for annual estimates than quarterly systems. The resulting CO2 emissions
monitoring ventilation CH4 liberated measurements. The primary would be calculated from these
from coal mines. disadvantages of this option relative to monitored values. Option 3 is consistent
Under this option, coal mine the other options that were considered with current practices for CH4 that is
operators are required to either (a) are that it is not as accurate as destroyed, where the produced gas
independently collect quarterly samples continuous emissions measurements, volume is presumably already being
of CH4 released from the ventilation and that, if required, it would impose a measured with continuous monitors.
system(s), using MSHA procedures, cost burden for those mines that do not For gas that is simply vented to the
have these samples analyzed for CH4 already have a daily sampling and atmosphere from degasification wells,
composition, and report the results to monitoring program in place. this requirement would ensure that this
us, or (b) to obtain the results from the We also decided against requiring gas is accurately measured.
quarterly testing that MSHA already mines with CEMS installed at We considered, but are not proposing,
conducts, and report those to EPA. ventilation systems to use the Option 1, which would estimate CH4
MSHA inspectors currently perform continuous monitoring devices to emissions based on the type of
quarterly mine safety inspections on monitor ventilation system CH4 degasification system employed. For
mines emitting 100,000 cf CH4 or more emissions. Mines without CEMS would example, in developing the U.S. GHG
per day, and as part of these follow the quarterly option proposed Inventory, we currently assume for
inspections, the inspectors test CH4 above. In many underground mines, selected mines that degasification
emissions rates and ventilation shaft CEMS devices are already in operation. emissions account for 40 percent of total
flow, using MSHA-approved sampling In such cases, this option may involve CH4 liberated from the mine. This
procedures and devices. The sample only placing such devices at or near the method is very simplistic and least
bottles are sent to the MSHA lab for mine vent outflows where the air costly, but there is relatively larger
analysis and the results are provided samples are taken by MSHA inspectors. uncertainty associated with the
back to the MSHA district offices for The primary advantage of continuous emissions estimated. Considering that
inclusion in the inspection report. monitoring is that it could increase the emissions from many degasification
Currently, the results of these quarterly accuracy of annual CH4 emissions wells are currently monitored, and the
measurements are generally not calculations because it takes into need to characterize the quantity of
provided back to the mine. these vented emissions more accurately,
We would like to take comment on 87 NIOSH, Handbook for Methane Control in we do not believe this option is
whether relying on MSHA sampling Mining, CDC Information Circular 9486, June 2006. appropriate.
We also considered, but are not includedproposed 40 CFR part 98, The second recovery process used for
proposing, Option 2, which would subparts A and FF. electric arc furnace dust uses a water-
require mine operators to conduct cooled, flash-smelting furnace to form
periodic sampling of gob gas vent holes vaporized zinc that is subsequently
Retained
and any other degasification boreholes, captured in a vacuum condenser. The
rather than installing continuous Reporters are to retain all data listed crude zinc oxide produced at secondary
monitoring. While such an approach in Section V.FF.5 of this preamble. A zinc recycling facilities is shipped to a
would involve lower capital costs than full list of records to be retained onsite zinc smelter for further processing.
CEMS, greater labor costs would be is included in proposed 40 CFR part 98, Zinc production results in both
involved with traveling to each (often subparts A and FF. combustion and process-related GHG
remote) well site to take samples. emissions. The major sources of GHG
GG. Zinc Production
Moreover, this method would not emissions from a zinc production
accurately reflect fluctuations in gas 1. Definition of the Source Category facility are the process-related emissions
quantity and CH4 concentration. Pre- Zinc is a metal used as corrosion- from the operation of electrothermic
mining degasification and gob wells are protection coatings on steel (galvanized furnaces at zinc smelters and Waelz
generally characterized by large metal), as die castings, as an alloying kilns at secondary zinc recycling
variations in emissions over time, as metal with copper to make brass, and as facilities. In an electrothermic furnace,
emissions can decline rapidly in each chemical compounds in rubber, reduction of zinc oxide using carbon
individual well, while new wells/vents ceramics, paints, and agriculture. For provided by the charging of coke to the
come on line as mining advances. this proposed rule, we are defining the furnace produces CO2. In the Waelz
The various approaches to monitoring kiln, the zinc feed materials are heated
zinc production source category to
GHG emissions are elaborated in the to approximately 1200 °C in the
consist of zinc smelters using
Underground Coal Mines TSD (EPA– presence of carbon producing zinc
pyrometallurgical processes and
HQ–OAR–2008–0508–032). vapor and carbon monoxide (CO). When
secondary zinc recycling facilities. Zinc
4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating smelters can process zinc sulfide ore combined with the surplus of air in the
Missing Data concentrates (primary zinc smelters) or kiln, the zinc vapors are oxidized to
A complete record of all measured zinc-bearing recycled and scrap form crude zinc oxide, and the CO
parameters used in the GHG emissions materials (secondary zinc smelters). A oxidized to form process-related CO2
calculations is required. Therefore, secondary zinc recycling facility emissions.
whenever a quality-assured value of a recovers zinc from zinc-bearing recycled Total nationwide GHG emissions from
required parameter is unavailable (e.g., and scrap materials to produce crude zinc production facilities operating in
if a meter malfunctions during unit zinc oxide for use as a feed material to the U.S. were estimated to be
operation) a substitute data value for the zinc smelters. Many of these secondary approximately 851,708 metric tons CO2e
missing parameter shall be used in the zinc recycling facilities have been built for the year 2006. This total GHG
calculations. specifically to process dust collected emissions estimate includes both
For each missing value of CH4 from electric arc furnace operations at process-related emissions (CO2 and CH4)
concentration, flow rate, temperature, steel mini-mills across the country. and the additional combustion
and pressure for ventilation and There are no primary zinc smelters in emissions (CO2, CH4, and N2O). Process-
degassification systems, the substitute the U.S. that use pyrometallurgical related GHG emissions were
data value shall be the arithmetic processes. The one operating U.S. approximately 528,777 metric tons CO2e
average of the quality-assured values of pyrometallurgical zinc smelter emissions (62 percent of the total
that parameter immediately preceding processes crude zinc oxide and calcine emissions). The remaining 38 percent or
and immediately following the missing produced from recycled zinc materials. 322,931 metric tons CO2e are from
data incident. If, for a particular These feed materials are first processed onsite stationary combustion.
parameter, no quality-assured data are through a sintering machine. The sinter Additional background information
available prior to the missing data is mixed with metallurgical coke and about GHG emissions from the zinc
incident, the substitute data value shall fed directly into the top of an production source category is available
be the first quality-assured value electrothermic furnace. Metallic zinc in the Zinc Production TSD (EPA–HQ–
obtained after the missing data period. vapor is drawn from the furnaces into a OAR–2008–0508–033).
vacuum condenser, which is then
5. Selection of Data Reporting 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
tapped to produce molten zinc metal.
Requirements The molten metal is then transferred Zinc smelters and secondary zinc
We propose that coal mines report, for directly to a zinc refinery or cast into recycling facilities in the U.S. vary in
all ventilation shafts and degasification zinc slabs. types and sizes of the metallurgical
systems (e.g., all boreholes), the Secondary zinc recycling facilities processes used and mix of zinc-
following parameters: CH4 liberated operating in the U.S. use either of two containing feedstocks processed to
from the shaft or borehole, the quantity thermal processes to recover zinc from produce zinc products. In developing
of CH4 destroyed (if applicable), and net recycled electric arc furnace dust and the threshold for zinc production
CH4 emissions on an annual basis. In other scrap materials. For the Waelz kiln facilities, we considered using annual
addition to reporting emissions, all process, the feed material is charged to GHG emissions-based threshold levels
input data needed to calculate liberation an inclined rotary kiln together with of 1,000, 10,000, 25,000 and 100,000
and emissions are to be reported, as well petroleum coke, metallurgical coke, or metric tons CO2e. Table GG–1 of this
as mine days of operation (for the anthracite coal. The zinc oxides in the preamble illustrates the emissions and
ventilation and degasification systems). gases from the kiln are then collected in facilities that would be covered under
A full list of data to be reported is a baghouse or electrostatic precipitator. these various thresholds.
TABLE GG–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR ZINC PRODUCTION FACILITIES

nationwide National
Threshold level emissions number of
metric tons CO2e/yr Metric tons
metric tons facilities CO2e/yr
Percent Facilities Percent
CO2e/yr
1,000 ........................................................ 851,708 9 851,708 100 9 100

10,000 ...................................................... 851,708 9 843,154 99 8 89
25,000 ...................................................... 851,708 9 801,893 94 5 56
100,000 .................................................... 851,708 9 712,181 84 4 44
We have concluded, based on smelters burning natural gas or other Option 3. Use CO2 emissions data
emissions estimates using production carbon-based fuels could be subject to from a stack test performed using U.S.
capacity, that the one primary zinc the estimating and reporting EPA reference test methods to develop
facility exceeds all thresholds requirements for general stationary fuel a site-specific process emissions factor
considered (Table GG–1 of this combustion units in proposed 40 CFR which is then applied to quantity
preamble). For the eight secondary zinc part 98, subpart C, depending on the measurement data of feed material or
production facilities, just half are over a level of total GHG emissions from the product for the specified reporting
25,000 metric tons CO2e threshold. We facility with respect to the reporting period. This monitoring method is
decided it is appropriate to propose a thresholds specified in proposed 40 CFR applicable to furnace or Waelz kiln
threshold of 25,000 metric tons CO2e for part 98, subpart A. configurations for which the GHG
reporting emissions from zinc Option 1. Apply a default emission emissions are contained within a stack
production facilities that is consistent factor for the process-related emissions or vent. Using site-specific emissions
with the threshold level being proposed to the facility zinc production rate. This factors based on short-term stack testing
for other source categories. This is a simplified emission calculation is appropriate for those facilities where
threshold level would avoid placing a method using only default emission process inputs (e.g., feed materials,
reporting burden on a zinc production factors to estimate CO2 emissions. The carbonaceous reducing agents) and
facility with inherently low GHG method requires multiplying the process operating parameters remain
emissions because of the type of amount of zinc produced by the relatively consistent over time.
metallurgical processes used and type of appropriate default emission factors Option 4. Use direct emissions
zinc product produced while still from the 2006 IPCC Guidelines. measurement of CO2 emissions. For
requiring the reporting of GHG furnace and kiln configurations in
Option 2. Perform a carbon balance of
emissions from the zinc production which the process off-gases are
all inputs and outputs using monthly
facilities releasing most of the GHG contained within a stack or vent, direct
measurements of the carbon content of
emissions in the source category. More measurement of the CO2 emissions can
specific process inputs and measure the
discussion of the threshold selection be made by either continuously
mass rate of these inputs. This method
analysis is available in the Zinc measuring the off-gas stream CO2
is the same as the IPCC Tier 3 approach
Production TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– concentration and flow rate using a
and the higher order methods in the
0508–033). For specific information on CEMS, or periodically measuring the
costs, including unamortized first year Canadian and Australian reporting
programs. Implementation of this off-gas stream CO2 concentration and
capital expenditures, please refer to flow rate using standard stack testing
section 4 of the RIA and the RIA cost method requires owners and operators
of affected zinc smelters to determine methods. Using a CEMS, the recorded
appendix. emissions measurement data would be
the carbon contents of materials added
3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring to the electrothermic furnace or Waelz reported annually. An annual emissions
Methods kiln by analysis of representative test could be used to develop a site-
EPA reviewed existing domestic and samples collected of the material or specific process emissions factor which
international GHG monitoring from information provided by the would then be applied to quantity
guidelines and protocols including the material suppliers. In addition, the measurement data of feed material or
2006 IPCC Guidelines, U.S. GHG quantities of these materials consumed product for the specified reporting
Inventory, the EU Emissions Trading during production are measured and period.
System, the Canadian Mandatory GHG recorded. To obtain the process-related Proposed Option. Under this
Reporting Program, and the Australian CO2 emission estimate, the material proposed rule, if you are required to use
National GHG Reporting Program. These carbon content would be multiplied by an existing CEMS to meet the
methods coalesce around the following the corresponding mass of material requirements outlined in proposed 40
four options for estimating process- consumed and a factor for conversion of CFR part 98, subpart C, you would be
related GHG emissions from zinc carbon to CO2. This method assumes required to use CEMS to estimate CO2
production facilities. Zinc smelters that all of the carbon is converted emissions. Provided that the CEMS
using hydrometallurgical processes (e.g., during the reduction process. The capture all combustion- and process-
electrolysis) would not be subject to the facility owner or operator would related CO2 emissions, you would be
estimating and reporting requirements determine the average carbon content of required to follow the requirements of
in proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart GG the material for each calendar month proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C to
for zinc production because the using information provided by the estimate CO2 emissions from the
processes used at these smelters do not material supplier or by collecting a industrial source. You would also refer
release process-related GHG emissions. composite sample of material and to proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C
However, combustion GHG emissions sending it to an independent laboratory to estimate combustion-related CH4 and
from the process equipment at these for chemical analysis. N2O emissions.
If you do not have CEMS that meet 4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating monthly average carbon content
the conditions outlined in proposed 40 Missing Data determined for material, and records of
CFR part 98, subpart C, or where the For electrothermic furnaces or Waelz the supplier provided information or
CEMS would not adequately account for kilns for which the owner or operator analyses used for the determination. If
process emissions, we propose that you calculates process GHG emissions using you use the CEMS procedure, you
follow Option 2, a carbon balance. You site-specific carbonaceous input would maintain the CEMS measurement
would still need to refer to proposed 40 material data, the proposed rule requires records.
CFR part 98, subpart C to estimate the use of substitute data whenever a A complete list of records to be
combustion-related CH4 and N2O quality-assured value of a parameter retained is included in proposed 40 CFR
emissions. Given the operating that is used to calculate GHG emissions part 98, subparts A and GG.
variations between the individual U.S. is unavailable, or ‘‘missing.’’ If the HH. Landfills
zinc production facilities (including carbon content analysis of carbon inputs
differences in equipment configurations, is missing or lost the substitute data 1. Definition of the Source Category
mix of zinc feedstocks charged, and value would be the average of the After being placed in a landfill, waste
types of carbon materials used) we are quality-assured values of the parameter is initially decomposed by aerobic
proposing Option 2 to estimate CO2 immediately before and immediately bacteria, and then by anaerobic bacteria,
emissions from an electrothermic after the missing data period. In those which break down organic matter into
furnace or Waelz kiln at zinc production cases when an owner or operator uses substances such as cellulose, amino
facilities because of the lower direct measurement by a CO2 CEMS, the acids, and sugars. These substances are
uncertainties indicated by the IPCC missing data procedures would be the further broken down through
Guidelines for these types of emissions same as the Tier 4 requirements fermentation into gases and short-chain
estimates, as compared to applying described for general stationary fuel organic compounds that form the
exclusively a default emissions factor combustion sources in proposed 40 CFR substrates for the growth of
based approach to these units on a part 98, subpart C. methanogenic bacteria, which convert
nationwide basis. 5. Selection of Data Reporting the fermentation products into
We decided not to propose the use of Requirements stabilized organic materials and biogas.
default CO2 emission factors (Option 1) CH4 generation from a given landfill
The proposed rule would require
because their application is more is a function of several factors,
annual reporting of the total annual CO2
appropriate for GHG estimates from including the total amount of waste
process-related emissions from the
aggregated process information on a disposed in the landfill, the
electrothermic furnaces and Waelz kilns
sector-wide or nationwide basis than for characteristics of the waste, and the
at zinc production facilities, as well as
determining GHG emissions from climatic conditions. The amount of CH4
any stationary fuel combustion
specific facilities. According to the 2006 emitted is the amount of CH4 generated
emissions. In addition we propose that
IPCC Guidelines, the uncertainty minus the amount of CH4 that is
additional information which forms the
associated with default emission factors destroyed and minus the amount of CH4
basis of the emissions estimates also be
could be as high as 50 percent, while oxidized by aerobic microorganisms in
reported so that we can understand and
the uncertainty associated with facility the landfill cover material prior to being
verify the reported emissions. This
specific estimates of process inputs and released into the atmosphere.
additional information includes the
carbon contents would be within 5 to 10 total number of Waelz kilns and Waste decaying in landfills also
percent. We considered the additional electrothermic furnaces operated at the produces CO2; however, this CO2 is not
burden of the material measurements facility, the facility zinc product counted in GHG totals as it is not
required for the carbon calculations production capacity, and the number of considered an anthropogenic emission.
small in relation to the increased facility operating hours in calendar year, Likewise, CO2 resulting from the
accuracy expected from using this site- carbon inputs by type, and carbon combustion of landfill CH4 is not
specific information to calculate the contents of inputs by type. accounted as an anthropogenic emission
process-related CO2 emissions. A complete list of data to be reported under international accounting
is included in proposed 40 CFR part 98, guidance.
We also decided against proposing
subparts A and GG. According to the 2008 U.S. Inventory,
Option 3 because of the potential for
MSW landfills emitted 111.2 million
significant variations at zinc production 6. Selection of Records That Must Be metric tons CO2e of CH4 in 2006.
facilities in the characteristics and Retained Generation of CH4 at these landfills was
quantities of the furnace or Waelz kiln 246.8 million metric tons CO2e;
inputs (e.g., zinc scrap materials, Maintaining records of the
information used to determine the however, 65.3 million metric tons CO2e
carbonaceous reducing agents) and were recovered and used (destroyed) in
reported GHG emissions is necessary to
process operating parameters. A method energy projects, 59.8 million metric tons
enable us to verify that the GHG
using periodic, short-term stack testing CO2e were destroyed by flaring, and
emissions monitoring and calculations
would not be practical or appropriate 12.4 million metric tons CO2e were
were done correctly. We propose that all
for those zinc production facilities oxidized in cover soils. The majority of
affected facilities maintain records of
where the furnace or Waelz kiln inputs the CH4 emissions from on-site
monthly facility production quantities
and operating parameters do not remain for each zinc product, number of facility industrial landfills occur at pulp and
relatively consistent over the reporting operating hours each month, and the paper facilities and food processing
period. annual facility production quantity for facilities. In 2006, these landfills
Further details about the selection of each zinc product (in tons). If you use emitted 14.6 million metric tons CO2e
the monitoring methods for GHG the carbon input procedure, you would CH4: 7.3 million metric tons CO2e from
emissions are available in the Zinc record for each carbon-containing input pulp and paper facilities, and 7.2
Production TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– material consumed or used (other than million metric tons CO2e from food
0508–033). fuel) the monthly material quantity, processing facilities.
We propose to require reporting from Several refineries have land application landfill minus soil oxidation
open and closed,88 MSW landfills units (also known as land treatment (‘‘generation threshold’’) or of CH4
meeting or exceeding the thresholds units) in which oily waste is tilled into emissions from a landfill, minus
described below. We also propose to the soil. We are seeking comment on the oxidation, after any destruction of
require reporting of industrial landfills exclusion of land application units from landfill gas at a combustion device
(e.g., landfills at food processing, pulp this rule. (‘‘emissions threshold’’).
and paper, and ethanol production For additional background
facilities) meeting or exceeding the Table HH–1 of this preamble
information on landfills, please refer to
applicable thresholds in the relevant the Landfills TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR– illustrates the emissions and facilities
subparts. Hazardous waste landfills and 2008–0508–034). that would be covered under these
construction and demolition landfills various thresholds for MSW landfills.
2. Selection of Reporting Threshold For landfills located at industrial
are not included in the landfills source
category as they are not considered In developing the threshold for facilities,89 please refer to the threshold
significant sources of GHG emissions. landfills, we considered thresholds of analyses for those sectors (e.g., food
The definition of landfills in this rule 1,000, 10,000, 25,000, and 100,000 processing, ethanol, pulp and paper).
does not include land application units. metric tons CO2e of CH4 generation at a
TABLE HH–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR MSW LANDFILLS (OPEN AND CLOSED)
emissions Total national
Threshold level (metric tons facilities Metric tons Percent Number Percent
CO2e) CO2e /year
1,000 metric tons CO2e (generation) ................... 111,100,000 7800 110,800,000 99.7 6,830 88
1,000 metric tons CO2e (emissions) .................... 111,100,000 7800 110,800,000 99.7 6,827 88
10,000 metric tons CO2e (generation) ................. 111,100,000 7800 104,400,000 94 3,484 45
10,000 metric tons CO2e (emissions) .................. 111,100,000 7800 102,800,000 93 3,060 39
25,000 metric tons CO2e (generation) ................. 111,100,000 7800 91,100,000 82 2,551 33
25,000 metric tons CO2e (emissions) .................. 111,100,000 7800 82,400,000 74 1,926 25
100,000 metric tons CO2e (generation) ............... 111,100,000 7800 65,600,000 59 1,038 13
100,000 metric tons CO2e (emissions) ................ 111,100,000 7800 39,300,000 35 441 6
The proposed threshold for reporting protocols include methodologies for The rate of gas flow to the destruction
emissions from MSW landfills is a estimating emissions from landfills (e.g., device; and the CH4 content of the gas.
generation threshold of 25,000 metric 2006 IPCC Guidelines, U.S. GHG These are quantified by directly
tons CO2e (i.e., CH4 generated at the Inventory, CCAR, EPA Climate Leaders, measuring the flow rate and CH4
landfill, minus oxidation in landfill EU Emissions Trading System, TCR, concentration of the gas stream to the
cover soils). This threshold is consistent EPA’s Landfill Methane Outreach destruction device(s).
with thresholds for other source Program, DOE 1605(b), Australia’s Option 3. Direct Measurement. Direct
categories and covers over 70 percent of National Mandatory GHG Reporting measurement methods for calculating
emissions from the source category. It Program (draft), NSPS/NESHAP, WRI/ CH4 emissions from landfills include
strikes a balance between the goal of WBCSD GHG Protocol, and National flux chambers and optical remote
covering the majority of the emissions Council of Air and Stream sensing.
while avoiding a reporting burden for Improvement). In general, these Proposed Option. As part of this
small MSW landfills and, especially, methodologies include three methods proposed rule, stationary fuel
small, closed MSW landfills. for monitoring emissions: The modeling combustion emissions unrelated to the
For a full discussion of the threshold method, the engineering method, and flaring of recovered landfill CH4, and
analysis, please refer to the Landfills the direct measurement method. emissions from the use of auxiliary fuel
TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–034). Option 1. Modeling Method. The to maintain effective operation of the
For specific information on costs, IPCC First Order Decay Model 90 in the flare (e.g., for pilot gas, or fuel used to
including unamortized first year capital 2006 IPCC Guidelines produces supplement the heating value of the
expenditures, please refer to section 4 of emissions estimates that reflect the landfill gas occurring at the landfill),
the RIA and the RIA cost appendix. degradation rate of wastes in a landfill. would be estimated and reported
This method uses waste disposal according to the proposed procedures in
3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring quantities, degradable organic carbon, proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C
Methods dissimilated degradable organic carbon, (General Stationary Fuel Combustion
This section of the preamble describes a decay rate, time lag before CH4 Sources), which are discussed in
the proposed methods for estimating generation, fraction of CH4 in landfill Section V.C of this preamble.
CH4 generation and emissions from gas, and an oxidation factor. In order to estimate CH4 emissions
landfills and for determining the Option 2. Engineering Method. Direct from the landfill we propose a
quantity of landfill CH4 destroyed. measurement of collected landfill gas to combination of Option 1 and Option 2.
Many domestic and international determine CH4 generation from landfills Modeling method. In the proposed
GHG monitoring guidelines and depends on two measurable parameters: rule, all landfills would be required to
88 For the purposes of this rule, an open landfill rule will have more than one source category. In 90 The IPCC First Order Decay Model is available
is one that has accepted waste during the reporting order to determine applicability, facilities must add at http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/
year. the emissions from all source categories for which vol5.html.
89 As explained in sections III and IV of this
there are methods proposed in the proposed rule.
preamble, many facilities reporting to the proposed
calculate CH4 generation and emissions systems already have such equipment in data period. For prolonged periods of
using the IPCC First Order Decay Model. place. missing data when a monitoring system
The IPCC First Order Decay Model has We are seeking comment on monthly is used, or for other non-monitored data,
two calculation options: A bulk waste sampling of landfill gas CH4 flow and the substitute data would be determined
option and a waste material-specific concentration as an alternative to a from the average value for the missing
option. The proposed rule would continuous composition analyzer. For parameter from the previous year, or
require the use of the material-specific the monthly sampling alternative, a from equations specified in the rule (for
option for all industrial landfills, and continuous gas flowmeter would still be waste disposal quantities). The
for MSW landfills when material- required. proposed rule would require a complete
specific waste quantity data are To estimate CH4 emissions remaining record of all parameters determined
available, as this option is expected to in the landfill gas combustion exhaust from company records that are used in
provide more accurate emission of a destruction device, apply the DE of the GHG emissions calculations (e.g.,
estimates. However, the accuracy the equipment to the quantity of CH4 disposal data, gas recovery data).
improvement is limited and at MSW collected as measured by the monitoring For purposes of the emissions
landfills, material-specific waste systems described above. calculation, we considered not
quantity data are expected to be sparse, Calculating generation and emissions. deducting CH4 destruction that was not
so use of the waste material-specific CH4 generation (adjusted for oxidation) recorded. However, not including CH4
approach would not be mandated for all is calculated by applying an oxidation recovery could greatly overestimate a
MSW landfills. Where landfills do not factor to generated CH4. For landfills facility’s emissions. On the other hand,
have waste material-specific data, the without gas collection systems, the allowing extended periods of missing
bulk waste option would be used. calculated value for CH4 generation data provides a disincentive to repairing
(adjusted for oxidation) is equal to CH4 the monitoring system.
We propose that the landfills use site-
emissions. For landfills with collection
specific data to determine waste 5. Selection of Data Reporting
systems, CH4 generation is also
disposal quantities (by type of waste Requirements
calculated using both the IPCC First
material disposed when material-
Order Decay model method and the gas We propose that landfills over the
specific waste quantity data are
collection data measurement method threshold report CH4 generation, CH4
available) and use appropriate EPA and
with a collection efficiency as explained oxidation, CH4 destruction (if
IPCC default values for all other factors
above. CH4 emissions are calculated by applicable), and net CH4 emissions on
used in the emissions calculation. To
deducting destroyed CH4 and applying an annual basis, as calculated above
accurately estimate emissions using this
an oxidation factor to the fraction of using both the First Order Decay Model
method, waste disposal data are needed
generated CH4 that is not destroyed. and, if applicable, gas flow data for
for the 50 year period prior to the year Direct Measurement Method. We also
of the emissions estimate. Annual waste landfills with gas collection systems. In
considered direct measurement at addition to reporting emissions, input
disposal data are estimated using landfills as an option. The direct
receipts for disposal where available, data needed to calculate CH4 generation
measurement methods available (e.g., and emissions would be required to be
and where unavailable, estimates based flux chambers and optical remote
on national waste disposal rates and reported. These data form the basis of
sensing) are currently being used for the GHG emission calculations and are
population served by the landfill. research purposes, but are complex and
Engineering method. For landfills needed for EPA to understand the
costly, their application to landfills is emissions data and verify the
with gas collection systems, it is also still under investigation, and they may
possible to estimate CH4 generation and reasonableness of the reported data. A
not produce accurate results if the full list of data to be reported is
emissions using gas flow and measuring system has incomplete
composition metering along with an included in proposed 40 CFR part 98,
coverage. subparts A and HH.
estimate of the landfill gas collection We are considering developing a tool
efficiency. We propose to require to assist reporters in calculating 6. Selection of Records That Must Be
landfills that have gas collection generation and emissions from this Retained
systems to calculate their CH4 source category. We have reviewed tools
generation (adjusted for oxidation) and Records to be retained include
for calculating emissions and emissions information on waste disposal
emissions using both the IPCC First reductions from these sources,
Order Decay Model (as described quantities, waste composition if
including IPCC’s Waste Model, and available, and biogas measurements.
above), and the measured CH4 collection National Council of Air and Stream
rates and estimated gas collection These records are needed to allow
Improvement’s GHG Calculation Tools verification that the GHG emission
efficiency. This proposal provides a for Pulp and Paper Mills, and EPA’s
means by which all landfills would monitoring and calculations were done
LandGEM, and are seeking comment on correctly. A full list of records to be
report emissions and generation the advantages and disadvantages of
consistently using the same (IPCC First retained onsite is included in proposed
using these tools as a model for tool 40 CFR part 98, subparts A and HH.
Order Decay Model) methodology, development and on the utility of
while also providing reporting of site- providing such a tool. II. Wastewater Treatment
specific emissions and generation
estimates based on gas collection data. 4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating 1. Definition of the Source Category
We propose that landfills with gas Missing Data An industrial wastewater treatment
collection systems continuously Missing data procedures for landfills system is a system located at an
measure the CH4 flow and concentration are proposed based on the monitoring industrial facility which includes the
at the flare or energy device. This methodology. In the case where a collection of processes that treat or
monitoring option is more accurate than monitoring system is used, the remove pollutants and contaminants,
a monthly sample given variability in substitute value would be calculated as such as soluble organic matter,
gas flow and concentration over time, the average of the values immediately suspended solids, pathogenic
and many landfills with gas collection proceeding and succeeding the missing organisms, and chemicals from waters
released from industrial processes. across a range of industries (e.g., pulp the measuring system has incomplete
Industrial wastewater treatment systems and paper, food processing, ethanol coverage.
may include a variety of processes, production, petrochemical, and Proposed Methods. We propose that
ranging from primary treatment for petroleum refining). As described in facilities use activity data, such as
solids removal to secondary biological Sections III and IV of this preamble, a measured COD concentration, and
treatment (e.g., activated sludge, facility may have more than one source operational characteristics (e.g., type of
lagoons) for organics reduction to category and emissions from all source system), and the IPCC Tier 1 method to
tertiary treatment for nutrient removal, categories for which there are methods calculate CH4 generation. To determine
disinfection, and more discrete (e.g., emissions from industrial CH4 destruction, we propose direct
filtration. In some systems, the biogas wastewater treatment systems) must be measurement of CH4 flow to combustion
(primarily CH4) generated by anaerobic included in the facility’s applicability devices. The proposed monitoring
digestion of organic matter is captured determination. Please see the preamble method uses a separate equation to
and destroyed by flaring and/or energy sections for the relevant sectors for more estimate CO2 from oil/water separators
recovery. The components and information on the applicability at petroleum refineries, based on
configuration of an industrial determination for your facility. California’s AB32 mandatory reporting
wastewater treatment system are Despite the fact that we are not rule. This approach allows the use of
determined by the type of pollutants proposing a separate threshold for default factors, such as a system
and contaminants targeted for removal industrial wastewater systems, there is emission factor, for certain elements of
or treatment. Industrial wastewater analysis in the Wastewater Treatment the calculation, and the use of site-
systems that rely on microbial activity TSD on the types of industrial facilities specific data where possible.
to degrade organic compounds under that would meet thresholds at the 1,000, CH4 emissions from industrial
anaerobic conditions are sources of CH4. 10,000, 25,000 and 100,000 million wastewater treatment system
CH4 emissions from wastewater metric tons CO2e level based on components other than digesters. To
treatment systems are primarily a emissions from wastewater alone. There estimate the amount of CH4 emissions
function of how much organic content is also a separate threshold analysis on from industrial wastewater treatment,
is present in the wastewater system and POTWs. plant-specific values of COD would be
how the wastewater is treated. For a full discussion of those determined by weekly sampling. The
Industries that have the potential to threshold analyses, please refer to maximum amount of CH4 that could
produce significant CH4B emissions Wastewater Treatment TSD (EPA–HQ– potentially be produced by the
from wastewater treatment—those with OAR–2008–0508–035). For specific wastewater under ideal conditions is
high volumes of wastewater generated information on costs, including calculated by multiplying the COD by
and a high organic wastewater load— unamortized first year capital the maximum CH4 producing capacity
include pulp and paper manufacturing, expenditures, please refer to section 4 of of the wastewater, per the 2006 IPCC
food processing, ethanol production, the RIA and the RIA cost appendix. Guidelines. This value is then
and petroleum refining. multiplied by a system-specific CH4
Wastewater treatment also produces 3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring conversion factor reflecting the
CO2; however, with the exception of Methods capability of a system to produce the
CO2 from oil/water separators at For this proposal, we reviewed maximum achievable CH4 based on the
petroleum refineries, this CO2 is not several protocols and programs for organic matter present in the
counted in GHG totals as it is not monitoring and/or estimating GHG wastewater.
considered an anthropogenic emission. emissions including the 2006 IPCC CH4 Generation from Anaerobic
Likewise, CO2 resulting from the Guidelines, the U.S. GHG Inventory, Digesters. If the wastewater treatment
combustion of digester CH4 is not CARB Mandatory GHG Emissions system includes an anaerobic digester,
accounted as an anthropogenic emission Reporting System, CCAR, National we propose that the CH4 generation of
under international accounting Council of Air and Stream the digester be measured continuously.
guidance. Improvement, DOE 1605(b), EPA Direct measurement to determine CH4
In 2006, CH4B emissions from Climate Leaders, TCR, UNFCCC Clean generation from digesters depends on
industrial wastewater treatment were Development Mechanism, the EU two measurable parameters: The rate of
estimated to be 7.9 million metric tons Emissions Trading System, and the New gas flow to the combustion device and
CO2e. Mexico Mandatory GHG Reporting the CH4 content of the gas. These are
The only wastewater treatment Program. These methodologies are all quantified by direct measurement of the
process emissions to be reported in this primarily based on the IPCC Guidelines. gas stream to the destruction device(s).
rule are those from onsite wastewater Based on this review, we considered The gas stream is measured by
treatment located at industrial facilities, the following options. continuous metering of both flow and
such as at pulp and paper, food Option 1. Modeling Method. This gas concentration. This continuous
processing, ethanol production, method involves the use of certain site- monitoring option is more accurate than
petrochemical, and petroleum refining specific measured activity data and a monthly sample given variability in
facilities. POTWs are not included in emission factors. The IPCC method, for gas flow and concentration over time,
this proposal because, as described in example, uses wastewater flow, COD, and many digesters already have such
the Wastewater Treatment TSD (EPA– and wastewater treatment system type equipment in place.
HQ–OAR–2008–0508–035), emissions to calculate CH4 emissions from We are also seeking comment on
from POTWs do not exceed the wastewater treatment. monthly sampling of digester gas CH4
thresholds considered under this rule. Option 2. Direct Measurement. This content as an alternative to a continuous
method allows for site-specific composition analyzer. For the monthly
2. Selection of Reporting Threshold measurements, but the methods CH4 content sampling alternative, a
A separate threshold is not proposed available (e.g., flux chambers and open continuous gas flow meter would still
for emissions from industrial path methods) are currently being used be required.
wastewater treatment system as these only for research purposes, are complex CH4 Destruction. To estimate CH4
emissions occur in a number of facilities and costly, and might not be accurate if destroyed at a digester, you would apply
the DE of the combustion equipment from wastewater treatment over a period aerobic include daily spread, solid
(lesser of manufacturer’s specified DE of time, we propose that the facility storage, drylot, and manure composting.
and 0.99) to the value of CH4 generated apply an average facility-level value for For the purposes of this rule, a manure
from anaerobic digestion estimated the missing parameter from management facility consists of
above. measurements of the parameter uncovered anaerobic lagoons, liquid/
CO2 emissions from oil/water preceding and following the missing slurry systems, pits, digesters, and
separators at petroleum refineries. To data incident, as specified in the drylots (including systems that combine
calculate CO2 emissions from proposed rule. The proposed rule would drylot with solid storage) onsite manure
degradation of petroleum or impurities require a complete record of all composting, other poultry manure
at oil/water separators at petroleum parameters determined from company systems, and cattle and swine deep
refineries, the volume of wastewater records that are used in the GHG bedding systems. The manure
treated would be measured weekly and emissions calculations (e.g., production management system does not include
multiplied by the non-methane volatile data, biogas combustion data). other onsite units and processes at a
organic carbon emission factor for the For purposes of the emissions livestock operation unrelated to the
type of separator used, and an emission calculations, we considered not stabilization and/or storage of manure.
factor for CO2 (mass of CO2/mass of non- deducting CH4 destruction that was not When livestock manure are stored or
methane volatile organic carbon). recorded. However, not including CH4 treated, the anaerobic decomposition of
Total emissions. Total emissions from destruction could greatly overestimate a materials in the manure management
wastewater treatment are the sum of the facility’s actual CH4 emissions. system produces CH4, while N2O is
CH4 emissions (including undestroyed produced as part of the nitrogen cycle
CH4 from digesters), and CO2 emissions. 5. Selection of Data Reporting
through the nitrification and
Other Options Considered. Direct Requirements
denitrification of the organic nitrogen in
measurement is another option we EPA proposes that industrial livestock manure and urine. The
considered but are not proposing in this wastewater treatment plants over the amount and type of emissions produced
rule. This method allows for site- threshold report annually both CH4 and are related to the specific types of
specific measurements, but it is costly CO2 emissions from wastewater manure management systems used at
and might not be accurate if the treatment system components other the farm and are driven by retention
measuring system has incomplete than digesters, and CH4 generation and time, temperature, and treatment
coverage. To be accurate, a direct destruction at digesters. In addition to conditions.
measurement system would need to be reporting emissions, generation, and Manure management also produces
complete both spatially (in that all destruction, input data used to calculate CO2; however, this CO2 is not counted
emissions pathways are covered, not emissions from the wastewater in GHG totals as it is not considered an
just individual pathways as is the case treatment process would be required to anthropogenic emission. Likewise, CO2
with anaerobic digesters, at which gas is be reported. These data form the basis resulting from the combustion of
commonly directly metered) and of the GHG emission calculations and digester CH4 is not accounted as an
temporally (as emissions can vary are needed for EPA to understand the anthropogenic emission under
greatly due to changes in influent and emissions data and verify the international accounting guidance.
conditions at the facility). reasonableness of the reported data. According to the 2008 U.S. Inventory,
We are considering developing a tool A full list of data to be reported is CH4 emissions from manure
to assist reporters in calculating included in proposed 40 CFR part 98, management systems totaled 41.4
emissions from this source category. subparts A and II. million metric tons CO2e, and N2O
EPA has reviewed tools for calculating emissions were 14.3 million metric tons
emissions from these sources, such as 6. Selection of Records That Must Be
Retained CO2e in 2006; manure management
National Council of Air and Stream systems account for 8 percent of total
Improvement’s GHG Calculation Tools Records to be retained include anthropogenic CH4 emissions and 3
for Pulp and Paper Mills, and is seeking information on influent flow rate, COD percent of N2O emissions in the U.S.
comment on the advantages and concentration, wastewater treatment Manure management systems which
disadvantages of using these tools as a system types, and digester biogas include one or more of the following
model for tool development, and the measurements. These records are components are to report emissions
utility of providing such a tool. needed to allow verification that the under this rule: Manure handling in
For additional information on the GHG emission monitoring and uncovered anaerobic lagoons, liquid/
proposed method, please see the 2006 calculations were done correctly. A full slurry systems, pits, digesters, and
IPCC Guidelines,91 the 2008 U.S. list of records to be retained onsite is drylots, including systems that combine
Inventory,92 and the Wastewater included in proposed 40 CFR part 98, drylot with solid storage. Emissions to
Treatment TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– subparts A and II. be reported include those from the
0508–035).
JJ. Manure Management systems listed above, and also emissions
4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating from any high rise houses for caged
Missing Data 1. Definition of the Source Category laying hens, broiler and turkey
On the occasion that a facility lacks A manure management system is a production on litter, deep bedding
data needed to determine the emissions system that stabilizes or stores livestock systems for cattle and swine, and
manure, or does both. Anaerobic manure composting occuring onsite as
91 2006 IPCC Guidelines. Chapter 6: Wastewater manure management systems include part of the manure management system.
Treatment and Discharge. (Volume 5 Waste.) liquid/slurry handling in uncovered This source category does not include
Available at http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/ anaerobic lagoons, ponds, tanks, pits, or systems which consist of only
public/2006gl/pdf/5_Volume5/ digesters. At some digesters, material components classified as daily spread,
V5_6_Ch6_Wastewater.pdf.
92 2008 U.S. Inventory. Chapter 8: Waste. other than manure is treated along with solid storage, pasture/range/paddock, or
Available at http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ the manure. Manure management manure composting. For detailed
emissions/usinventoryreport.html. systems in which treatment is primarily descriptions of system types, please
refer to the Manure Management TSD N2O emissions. The ‘‘emissions Table JJ–1 of this preamble presents
(EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–036). threshold’’ includes the CH4 and N2O the estimated head of livestock that
A facility that is subject to the that is emitted to the atmosphere from would meet the thresholds evaluated for
proposed rule only because of emissions these facilities. In the emissions the highest GHG-emitting common
from manure management would also threshold, CH4 that is destroyed at manure management systems for beef
report CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions digesters is taken into account and (steers and heifers at a feedlot), dairy
from the combustion of supplemental deducted from the total CH4 generation (cows at an uncovered anaerobic lagoon,
fuel in flares using the methods in calculated. heifers on dry lot without solids
proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C, but To estimate the number of farms at separation), swine (farrow to finish at an
would not be required to report any each threshold, EPA first developed a uncovered anaerobic lagoon), and
other combustion emissions. number of model farms to represent the poultry (layers and pullets at an
manure management systems that are uncovered anaerobic lagoon).
2. Selection of Reporting Threshold most common on large farms and have Other types of farms and manure
In developing the threshold for the greatest potential to exceed the GHG management systems could require
manure management, we considered thresholds. Next, we used EPA’s GHG significantly higher head counts to meet
thresholds of 1,000, 10,000, 25,000, and inventory methodology for manure the thresholds considered: Meeting the
100,000 metric tons CO2e of CH4 management, to estimate the numbers of 25,000 tCO2e threshold could require
generation and N2O emissions at a livestock that would need to be present 978,000 head for beef on pasture, 13,000
manure management system to exceed the threshold for each model head for some dairy liquid slurry
(‘‘generation threshold’’), and CH4 and farm type. Finally, we combined the systems, 171,000 head of farrow to
N2O emissions at manure management numbers of livestock required on each finish swine using a deep pit for
systems (‘‘emissions threshold’’). The model farm to meet the thresholds with manure, and 47,028,300 broilers on
‘‘generation threshold’’ is the amount of U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) litter. For more information on
CH4 and N2O that would be emitted data on farm sizes to determine how estimated head of livestock that would
from the facility if no CH4 destruction many farms in the United States have meet these thresholds for other manure
takes place. This includes all CH4 the livestock populations required to management system types, please see
generation from all manure management meet the GHG thresholds for each model the Manure Management TSD (EPA–
system types, including digesters, and farm. HQ–OAR–2008–0508–036).
TABLE JJ–1. ESTIMATED HEAD OF LIVESTOCK TO MEET THRESHOLDS

Threshold Levels (metric tons CO2e)
1,000 10,000 25,000 100,000
Total number of head to meet threshold
Beef .................................................................................................................................. 3,500 35,500 89,000 356,000

Dairy ................................................................................................................................. 200 2,000 5,000 20,000
Swine ............................................................................................................................... 3,000 29,000 73,000 291,500
Poultry .............................................................................................................................. 39,500 358,000 895,000 3,580,000
Although data are available at the screening tools such as a look-up table existing farm size data are presented in
national level on the number of farms of or computerized calculator to help the Manure Management TSD (EPA–
certain sizes, most of the population owners or operators determine if they HQ–OAR–2008–0508–036).
sizes needed to meet these thresholds meet the reporting threshold. A table The proposed threshold for reporting
occur in the largest farm size categories, could be developed that indicated emissions from manure management
in which data are not sufficiently whether a facility had a sufficient systems is the emission threshold of
disaggregated to determine how many number of animals to warrant further
25,000 metric tons CO2e. More
farms of such sizes exist. For example, screening. If the initial screening
specifically, the CH4 and N2O emissions
the largest dairy farm size category for through use of the table indicated that
from manure management are summed
which data is available is ‘‘1,000 head the facility may meet the reporting
to determine if a manure management
or more.’’ The number of dairy farms threshold a simple computerized
with populations large enough to meet calculator (e.g., web-based model) system meets or exceeds the threshold.
thresholds for 10,000 metric tons CO2e utilizing site-specifica data such as the Facilities exceeding the threshold
(2,000 animals) and above therefore had type of manure management system and would report both of these GHG
to be estimated using expert judgment. the average number of head, along with emissions. This threshold includes the
It is estimated that at the proposed some other default data provided in largest emitters of GHG from this source
threshold, fewer than 50 manure look-up tables could be used to category, while avoiding reporting from
management systems at beef, dairy, and determine if a facility met the reporting many small farms with less significant
swine operations would be required to threshold. Screening devices, if utilized, emissions. For a full discussion of the
report. Table JJ does not determine could assist owners or operators in threshold analysis, please refer to
applicability alone, but rather serves as determining if they are near the Manure Management TSD (EPA–HQ–
a ‘‘screening’’ guide in determining the threshold for reporting and therefore OAR–2008–0508–036). For specific
approximate facility size that meets the potentially avoid costs incurred from information on costs, including
applicability requirements. We are also monthly manure analysis proposed in unamortized first year capital
seeking comment on the advantages and the calculation method of the rule. More expenditures, please refer to section 4 of
disadvantages of using additional information and estimates based on the RIA and the RIA cost appendix.
We are seeking comment on the IPCC methodology and measured that a default value for collection
option of using a generation threshold volatile solids values. efficiency is applied to the measured
instead of the proposed emissions We propose that the amount of quantity of CH4 flow to a destruction
threshold. In the generation threshold volatile solids excreted be calculated device. We are seeking comment on the
option, the CH4 generation (including using (1) calculation of manure quantity proposed method and on the proposed
CH4 generated and later combusted) and entering the system using livestock default collection efficiency values for
the N2O emissions from manure population data and default values for estimating leakage from digesters.
management are summed to determine average animal mass and manure CH4 Emissions from Digesters. We
if a manure management system meets generation, and (2) monthly sampling propose that emissions from digesters be
or exceeds the threshold. Facilities and testing of excreted manure for total calculated as the sum of CH4 that is not
exceeding the threshold would report volatile solids content. destroyed at the destruction device, and
both GHG generation and emissions. We We are seeking comment on the CH4 that leaks from the digester.
estimated that this option would cover option of using facility-specific N2O Emissions. We propose that N2O
several farms with digesters that would livestock population and mass, and emissions be calculated using the IPCC
not be covered in the emissions default values for volatile solids rate to methodology and measured nitrogen (N)
threshold option. estimate total volatile solids, instead of values.
measured values. We are also seeking We propose that the amount of
3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring comment on whether a different nitrogen entering the manure
Methods sampling and testing frequency, such as management system be measured
Many domestic and international quarterly, would be more appropriate through (1) calculation of manure
GHG programs provide monitoring than monthly. quantity entering the system using
guidelines and protocols for estimating The maximum amount of CH4 that livestock population data and default
emissions from manure management could potentially be produced by the values for average animal mass and
(e.g., the 2006 IPCC Guidelines, the U.S. manure under ideal conditions would manure generation, and (2) monthly
GHG Inventory, DOE 1605(b), CARB be calculated by multiplying the volatile sampling and testing of excreted manure
Mandatory GHG Emissions Reporting solids by the maximum CH4-producing for total nitrogen content.
System, CCAR, EPA Climate Leaders, capacity of the manure (B0), a default We are seeking comment on the
TCR, UNFCCC Clean Development value included in the GHG Inventory. A option of using facility-specific
Mechanism, EPA AgSTAR, and Chicago system-specific CH4 conversion factor livestock population and mass, and
Climate Exchange). These would then be applied to determine the default values for nitrogen excretion rate
methodologies are all based on the IPCC amount of CH4 produced by the specific to estimate total N, instead of measured
Guidelines. system type. values.
CH4 Generation at Digesters. If the Each manure management system
Based on the review of these methods, manure management system includes a type has an associated default N2O
we considered the following options. digester, we propose that the CH4 emission factor which would be applied
Option 1. Modeling Method. This generation of the digester be measured to the amount of nitrogen managed by
method involves the use of certain site- continuously. Direct measurement to the system.
specific measured activity data and determine CH4 generation from digesters GHG Emissions. Reporters would be
emission factors. The IPCC method, for depends on two measurable parameters: required to complete the following to
example, uses volatile solids, nitrogen The rate of gas flow to the combustion calculate the emissions for reporting.
excretion, climate data, and manure device, and the CH4 content of the gas. Estimate and report GHG emissions
management system type to calculate These would be quantified by direct by adding the CH4 emissions from
CH4 and N2O emissions from manure measurement of the total gas stream. We manure management systems other than
management systems. propose that the gas stream be measured digesters, the N2O emissions from
Option 2. Direct Measurement. This by continuous metering of both flow manure management systems, and, for
method allows for site-specific and gas concentration. This continuous manure management systems which
measurements, but the methods monitoring option is more accurate than include digesters, the CH4 emissions
available (e.g., flux chambers and open a monthly sample given variability in (monitored CH4 generation at the
path methods) are currently being used gas flow and concentration over time, digester minus CH4 destruction at the
only for research purposes, are complex and many digesters already have such digester) from the anaerobic digester.
and costly, and might not be accurate if equipment in place. Direct measurement is another option
the measuring system has incomplete We are also seeking comment on we considered but are not proposing in
coverage. monthly sampling of digester gas CH4 this rule. A direct measurement system
Proposed option. We propose that content as an alternative to a continuous must be complete both spatially (in that
facilities use activity data, such as the composition analyzer. For the monthly all emissions pathways are covered) and
number of head of livestock, operational CH4 content sampling alternative, a temporally (as emissions can vary
characteristics (e.g., physical and continuous gas flow meter would still greatly due to changes in population,
chemical characteristics of the manure, be required. diet, and conditions at the facility) and
including measured volatile solids and CH4 Destruction at Digesters. To would hence be difficult and expensive
nitrogen values, type of management estimate CH4 destruction at a digester, to implement accurately.
system(s)), and climate data, with the you would apply the DE of the We are considering developing a tool
IPCC method to calculate CH4 and N2O destruction equipment (lesser of to assist reporters in calculating
emissions, and measured values for gas manufacturer’s specified DE and 0.99) emissions from this source category.
destruction. and the ratio of operating hours to There are several existing tools for
CH4 emitted at manure management reporting hours to the value of CH4 calculating emissions and emissions
system types other than digesters. We generated from anaerobic digestion reductions from manure management
propose that CH4 emissions at manure estimated above. systems, including EPA’s FarmWare and
management system components other CH4 Leakage at Digesters. To estimate CCAR’s Livestock Project Reporting
than digesters be calculated using the CH4 leakage from digesters, we propose Protocol. We are seeking comment on
the advantages and disadvantages of These facilities or companies (in the counting of coal supply; and feasibility
using such tools as a model for tool case of coal importers and exporters) of monitoring or calculation methods.
development and on the utility of would report on the CO2 emissions that We are proposing to include all active
providing such a tool. would result from complete combustion coal mines, coal importers, coal
The various approaches to monitoring or oxidation of the quantities of coal exporters, and reclaimers of waste coal
GHG emissions, as well as specific cost supplied. For completeness, this source as reporters under this subpart.
information, are elaborated in the category also includes coal exporters. We are proposing to require all
Manure Management TSD (EPA–HQ– Facilities that use coal for energy owners or operators of active
OAR–2008–0508–036). purposes should refer to proposed 40 underground and surface coal mines to
CFR part 98, subpart C (General report under proposed 40 CFR part 98,
4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating subpart KK. There were 1,365 active
Missing Data Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources).
Facilities that use coal for non-energy coal mines (both underground and
On the occasion that a facility lacks uses (e.g., as a reducing agent in metal surface mines) operating in the U.S. in
sufficient data to determine the production such as ferroalloys, zinc, 2007, according to the MSHA.
emissions from manure management etc.) should refer to the relevant Currently, coal mines routinely monitor
over a period of time, we propose that subparts of the proposed rule. coal quantity and coal quality data for
the facility apply an average facility- Underground coal mine operators who use in coal sale contracts as well as for
level value for the missing parameter reporting requirements to various State
are included in this subpart should also
from measurements of the parameter and Federal agencies.
refer to proposed 40 CFR part 98,
preceding and following the missing We are proposing that importers of
subpart FF (Underground Coal Mines)
data incident, as specified in the coal into the U.S. report under proposed
in order to account for any combustion
proposed rule. The proposed rule would 40 CFR part 98, subpart KK. Reporting
and fugitive emissions separately, as
require a complete record of all for coal importers is proposed at the
described in Sections III and IV of this
parameters determined from company company level, as opposed to the
preamble. A description of the
records that are used in the GHG facility level, because the importers of
requirements related to the conversion
emissions calculations (e.g., historical record are typically companies, and
of coal to liquid fuel is covered in
livestock population data, biogas these companies currently track and
destruction data). Section V.LL of this preamble.
report imports. Most of the 36 million
For emissions calculation purposes, Coal is a combustible black or tons of coal that were imported to the
EPA considered not deducting CH4 brownish-black sedimentary rock U.S. in 2007 were used for power
recovery and destruction that was not composed mostly of carbon and generation. A small number of electric
recorded, but not including CH4 hydrocarbons. It is the most abundant utility companies were responsible for
destruction could greatly overestimate fossil fuel produced in the U.S. Over 90 the large majority of coal imports in
an entity’s actual CH4 emissions. percent of the coal used in the U.S. is 2006.93 In many cases, the importing
used to generate electricity. Coal is also companies also own and operate
5. Selection of Data Reporting used as a basic energy source in many
Requirements electricity generating or industrial
industries, including cement and paper. facilities that would be included as
EPA proposes that facilities report In 2006, the combustion of coal for covered facilities under other subparts
CH4 and N2O emissions, along with the useful heat and work resulted in of the proposed rule. Because these
input data to calculate these values. emissions of 2,065.3 million metric tons entities already collect much of this
These data form the basis of the GHG CO2, or 29 percent of total U.S. GHG information, EPA believes that the
emission calculations and are needed emissions. reporting requirements for importers
for EPA to understand the emissions The supply chain for delivering coal would impose a minimal additional
data and verify the reasonableness of the to consumers is relatively burden.
reported data. A full list of data to be straightforward. It includes coal mines We are proposing that exporters of
reported is included in proposed 40 or importers, in some cases coal coal report under proposed 40 CFR part
CFR part 98, subparts A and JJ. washing or preparation onsite or at 98, subpart KK. In 2007, 59.2 million
6. Selection of Records That Must Be dedicated offsite plants, and transport tons of coal produced (mined) in the
Retained (usually by rail) to consumers. The U.S. U.S. were exported. Coal exporters may
typically produces nearly all of its include coal mining companies who
Records to be retained include domestic coal needs; in 2007, domestic directly sell their coal to entities outside
information on animal population, coal production accounted for 97 the U.S., or other retailers who export
manure management system types, percent of domestic coal consumption. the coal (typically via barge from one of
animal waste characteristics, and A relatively small share of coal several U.S. ports). Coal exports are
digester biogas measurements. These consumed in the U.S. (3 percent in included in proposed 40 CFR part 98,
records are needed to allow verification 2007) is imported from other countries, subpart KK so that the total supply of
that the GHG emission monitoring and and a small share of U.S. production is coal (and associated GHG emissions)
calculations were done correctly. A full exported for use abroad (5 percent in into the U.S. economy is balanced
list of records to be retained onsite is 2007). against the coal that leaves the country.
included in proposed 40 CFR part 98, In determining the most appropriate Typically, coal exporters characterize
subparts A and JJ. point in the supply chain of coal for the quantity (tons) and heat value of the
KK. Suppliers of Coal reporting potential CO2 emissions, we coal. Thus, this reporting requirement
considered the following criteria: An would impose a minimal additional
1. Definition of the Source Category administratively manageable number of burden on coal exporters.
Proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart KK reporting facilities; complete coverage of
93 In 2006, the eight largest coal-importing power
would require reporting by facilities or coal supply as a group of facilities or in
generating companies accounted for 87 percent of
companies that introduce or supply coal combination with facilities reporting total imported coal by electric utilities (FERC Form
into the economy (e.g., coal mines, coal under other subparts of the proposed 423 and EIA 906). Approximately 80 percent of coal
importers, and waste coal reclaimers). rule; minimal irreconcilable double- imports were used in the electricity sector in 2006.
We are proposing that reclaimers of as iron and steel, and ferro-alloys. transporters would miss this coal
waste coal report under proposed 40 Therefore, GHG emissions associated production entirely.
CFR part 98, subpart KK. In some parts with the combustion or oxidation of We request comment on the inclusion
of the U.S., waste coal that was mined coke imports and domestically of active underground and surface coal
decades ago and placed in waste piles produced coke would already be mines, coal importers, coal exporters,
is now being actively recovered and included in the actual GHG emissions and waste coal reclaimers, and the
sold to end users. Because this coal is reported under those subparts. exclusion of offsite preparation plants,
technically not being ‘‘mined’’ but is We considered but are not proposing coke importers and coke manufacturing
nonetheless entering the U.S. economy that coal preparation plants located facilities, and coal rail transporters from
for the first time, facilities that reclaim offsite from coal mines report the reporting requirements under proposed
or recover such waste coal from waste potential CO2 emissions associated with 40 CFR part 98, subpart KK. For
coal piles and sell or deliver it to end- their processed coal. Some of these additional background information on
users are being included for reporting facilities may be included as reporting suppliers of coal, please refer to the
under proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart facilities under proposed 40 CFR part Suppliers of Coal TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–
KK as waste coal reclaimers. Because 98, subpart C for direct emissions from
2008–0508–037).
these facilities would need to collect combustion. An unknown but likely
data on the quantity and quality (e.g., very small share of coal production 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
heat value) of their product, this annually requires additional preparation
reporting requirement should impose a or washing at an offsite preparation In considering a threshold for coal
minimal additional burden on coal plant. Typically, only the smaller mines suppliers, we considered the
reclaimers. do not do their preparation onsite. We application of the following emissions-
We considered but are not proposing are not requiring offsite coal preparation based thresholds for each affected
that facilities that convert coking coal plants to report under this subpart company or facility under proposed 40
into industrial coke and importers of because the potential CO2 emissions CFR part 98, subpart KK (e.g., coal mine,
coke report under proposed 40 CFR part from coal supplied by these facilities is coal importer, coal exporter, or waste
98, subpart KK. U.S. coke imports in already accounted for by reported data coal reclaimer): 1,000 metric tons CO2e,
2007 constituted only 2.5 million tons from coal mines, coal importers, and 10,000 metric tons CO2e, 25,000 metric
(about 0.2 percent of total U.S. coal waste coal reclaimers. tons CO2e and 100,000 metric tons CO2e
production) and can therefore be Instead of requiring coal mines to per year. For coal suppliers, these
considered negligible. Most report as coal suppliers, we also thresholds would be applied to the CO2
domestically consumed coal-based coke considered, but are not proposing, that emissions that would result from
(87 percent) is derived from rail operators report the quantity of coal complete combustion or oxidation of the
domestically-mined coal or imported they transport. We have determined that coal produced or supplied into the U.S.
coal, and therefore the inclusion of coal requiring reporting on coal transport economy, rather than the actual GHG
mines and coal importers in this subpart would add complexity without emissions for the individual facilities or
already provide for coverage of carbon increasing the accuracy of information companies. To provide general
contained in the coke (and the potential on potential CO2 emissions associated information on how the thresholds
CO2 emissions from oxidizing or with the supply of coal to the U.S. would affect the coal industry, we used
combusting the coke). Only 14 percent economy. It is our understanding that, a weighted average carbon content of
of coal-based coke consumed unlike coal mines or coal importers, 1,130 lbs/short ton.94 These thresholds
domestically is imported directly as coal transporters do not routinely translate into annual coal production for
coke. Furthermore, coke production is collect information about the carbon a single mine of 532 short tons, 5,321
an energy- and emissions-intensive content or heating value of the coal they short tons, 13,303 short tons, and 53,211
process, and these facilities are likely to are transporting, so such reporting short tons, respectively.
be above thresholds for the general requirements would add to the reporting Coal Mines. Table KK–1 of this
stationary fuel combustion sources burden. Furthermore, in the case of preamble illustrates the coal mine
(proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart C) mine mouth power plants for which the emissions and facilities that would be
and industrial process categories such coal does not travel via rail, rail covered under these various thresholds.
TABLE KK–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR COAL MINES

Total 2007 Total 2007 Emissions covered Facilities covered
Threshold level national number of
metric tons CO2e/yr emissions facilities in the Million metric Number of Percent of
(million metric U.S. tons CO2e/yr 2 Percent facilities 3 facilities
tons CO2e/yr) 1
1,000 ........................................................ 2,153 1,365 2,146 99.7 1,346 99

10,000 ...................................................... 2,153 1,365 2,146 99.7 1,237 91
25,000 ...................................................... 2,153 1,365 2,144 99.6 1,117 82
100,000 .................................................... 2,153 1,365 2,130 98.9 867 64
Source: EIA Table FE4 and 2007 MSHA database.
Notes:
(1) 2007 National Emissions (metric tons CO2e) = 2007 Production × U.S. Weighted Average CO2 content (4,143 lbs/short ton)/(2205 lbs/met-
ric ton).
(2) Emissions covered (metric tons CO2e) = sum of coal CO2 emissions for all facilities with metric tons CO2e production greater than the
threshold.
94 Carbon content is found using the weighted production (tons) from the 2007 MSHA database. is then used to find carbon content from the derived
average of CO2 (lbs/MMbtu) from EIA Table FE4 The molecular mass ratio of carbon to CO2 (12/44) CO2 (4,143 lbs/short ton).
along with the heat content (MMbtu/ton) and
(3) Facilities covered = total number of facilities with metric tons CO2e production greater than the threshold.
For this rule, we propose to include sale to consumers already collect carbon content. In practice, coal
all active underground and surface coal information about the quantity and suppliers routinely and frequently
mines, with no threshold. Of the quality (e.g., heating value) of coal to be monitor both the weight and energy
approximately 1,365 active coal mines sold. Reporting to us under proposed 40 content of coal for contractual purposes
operating in 2007, the 25,000 metric CFR part 98, subpart KK would (e.g., daily measurements of tonnage
tons CO2e threshold (corresponding to therefore impose only minimal and analyses of the BTU, sulfur, and ash
1,140.8 million tons of coal production) additional burden on these facilities. content of coal) as well as for reporting
would include the largest 1,117 coal For a full discussion of the threshold requirements to various State and
mines and 99.6 percent of U.S. coal analysis, please refer to the Suppliers of Federal agencies. We propose that all
production. All active U.S. coal mines Coal TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508– coal suppliers report these routinely-
already report annual (and quarterly) 037). For specific information on costs, collected data, and use them as a basis
coal production (based on aggregated including unamortized first year capital for estimating the CO2 emissions
daily production data) to MSHA. The expenditures, please refer to section 4 of associated with the coal.
additional reporting required under this the RIA and the RIA cost appendix. For the purpose of this calculation,
proposal is the carbon content of the we propose that larger coal mines (i.e.,
coal, which can be calculated using the coal mines that produce over 100,000
Methods
coal’s higher heating value (HHV) also short tons of coal per year) use mine-
referred to as the gross calorific value We are proposing the reporting of the specific, carbon content values.
(GCV). All active U.S. coal mines amount of coal produced or supplied to Generally, the carbon content of coal
already conduct daily proximate the economy annually, as well as the can be determined through one of two
analysis to record the HHV for coal sales CO2 emissions that would result from procedures. The most accurate method
contracts. An alternative for coal mines complete oxidation or combustion of is to determine the coal’s carbon content
with annual production lower than this quantity of coal. (carbon mass fraction) directly through
100,000 short tons is offered in the The only GHG required to be reported ultimate analysis of the coal’s chemical
proposed rule to estimate CO2 emissions under this subpart is CO2. Combustion constituents. An alternative method is
using HHV and default values, making of coal may also lead to trace quantities to measure the coal’s energy content
this a very minimal additional reporting of CH4 and N2O emissions.95 Because (HHV, which is often expressed in units
burden. Thus, we have determined that the quantity of CH4 and N2O emissions of MMBTU per unit weight) and use it
including all mines as reporters under are highly variable and dependent on as an indicator of the coal’s carbon
proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart KK technology and operating conditions in content. This is done by establishing a
would not significantly increase the which the coal is being consumed statistically significant correlation
(unlike CO2), we are not proposing that between the coal’s heating value and the
burden on small coal mines. We are
coal suppliers report on these emission. carbon content of the coal, and using
seeking comments on this conclusion.
Coal Importers. As noted above, the We seek comment on whether or not this correlation to estimate the carbon
majority of imported coal is imported by EPA should use the national inventory content (carbon mass fraction) of a given
power plants for steam generation of estimates of CH4 and N2O emissions batch of coal with known heating value.
electricity, with the remainder imported from coal combustion, and apportion For instance, a linear relationship
by other sizeable industrial facilities. them to individual coal suppliers based between coal heating value and coal
We propose that all coal importers on the quantity of their products. carbon content can be established. This
We are proposing that coal mines, alternative approach is convenient
report, with no threshold. Because most
coal importers, coal exporters, and
of the imported coal is brought into the because heat value measurements of
reclaimers of waste coal use a mass-
U.S. by companies owning facilities that coal are taken routinely and frequently
balance method to calculate CO2
would already be required to report by coal mines, coal importers, coal
emissions. The mass balance approach
GHG data to EPA under other subparts exporters, and coal retailers.
is based on readily available For the purpose of proposed 40 CFR
of the proposed 40 CFR part 98, EPA information: The quantity of coal (tons),
believes that there would be a minimal part 98, subpart KK, EPA proposes that
and the carbon content of the coal (as coal mines that produce over 100,000
incremental burden associated the determined by the mine, importer,
inclusion of all importing companies. short tons of coal per year have two
exporter, or waste reclaimer, according
We are seeking comments on this options for reporting the carbon content
to the methodology described below).
conclusion. of their coal: (1) Daily measurements of
The formula is simple and can be
Coal Exporters. Under proposed 40 coal carbon content through ultimate
automated. The mass-balance approach
CFR part 98, subpart KK, we are analyses (daily sampling and analyses,
is used extensively in national GHG
proposing that all coal exporting reported as annual weighted average), or
inventories, and in existing reporting
companies report, with no threshold. (2) a combination of daily
guidelines for facilities, companies, and
Coal exporters already collect measurements of coal HHV through
states, such as the WRI/WBCSD GHG
information about the quantity and proximate analyses and monthly
Protocol.
quality (e.g., heating value) of coal to be measurements of carbon content
We propose that coal suppliers be
exported. Reporting to us under through ultimate analyses, using an
required to report both the total weight
proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart KK established, statistically significant
of coal produced or supplied annually
would therefore impose only minimal correlation to estimate the daily
(tons per year), as well as either the
additional burden on these companies. weighted average coal carbon content
carbon content (carbon mass fraction) or
Waste coal reclaimers. Under (mass fraction), as described in the rule.
coal HHV, which can be a proxy for
proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart KK, We propose that a minimum of one year
we are proposing all waste coal 95 CO , CH , and N O emissions from coal of data be used to establish such a mine-
2 4 2
reclaimers report, with no threshold. combustion 2065.3, 0.8, and 10.23 million metric specific statistically significant
Parties that recover this waste coal for tons CO2e, respectively. correlation between the coal carbon
content (as measured by ultimate weighted annual average GCV according Information from coal mines should
analyses) and coal heating value (as to specified methodology that is not be reported at the facility level, and
measured by proximate analyses). We listed with a corresponding default coal should include mine name, mine MSHA
request comment on this approach, carbon content value in table KK–1 of identification number, name of
including the minimum number of data this rule. Further information on various operating company, coal production
points necessary to establish a approaches to monitoring GHG coal rank or classification (e.g.,
statistically significant mine-specific emissions is elaborated in the Suppliers anthracite, bituminous, sub-bituminous,
relationship between coal carbon of Coal TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– or lignite), facility-specific measured
content and coal HHV, and how often 0508–037). values of coal carbon content or HHV
and under what circumstances should that are used to calculate CO2 emissions,
the statistical relationship be 4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating and the estimated CO2 emissions (metric
reestablished. According to MSHA data, Missing Data tons CO2/yr).
706 mines produced over 100,000 short We have determined that some of the Coal importers, coal exporters, and
tons of coal during 2007 (52 percent of information to be reported by coal waste coal reclaimers should report
all mines), accounting for 98 percent of mines, coal importers, coal exporters, company name and technical contact
total production. We propose that a and waste coal reclaimers is routinely information (name, e-mail, phone).
more stringent method for calculating collected as part of standard operating Coal importers should report at the
carbon content be applied to these larger practices (e.g., coal tonnage). For these corporate level. Coal importers already
mines in order to reduce the uncertainty cases, we expect no missing data would measure coal quantity for each shipment
of the CO2 data collected. occur. entering the U.S. Importers generally
EPA proposes that coal mines with Typically, coal is weighed using conduct proximate analyses on each
annual coal production less 100,000 automated systems on the conveyor belt shipment to assure that coal quality
short tons use either one of the above meets the coal specification under
or at the loadout facility. In general, the
approaches for estimating carbon contract. Some importers may also
weighing and sampling of coal at coal
content, or use a third alternative. This conduct ultimate analysis. Coal
mines are conducted at about the same
alternative involves estimating the importers should report the quantity of
time to ensure consistency between
coal’s carbon content based only on coal imported, coal rank or
quantity and quality of coal. In this rule,
daily measurements of coal HHV classification (e.g., anthracite,
EPA proposes that the most current
through proximate analyses and a bituminous, sub-bituminous, or lignite),
version of NIST Handbook 44 published
default CO2 emissions factor provided country of origin, origin-specific
by Weights and Measures Division,
as described in proposed 40 CFR part measured values of coal carbon content
National Institute of Standards and
98, subpart KK. EPA has concluded that and HHV that are used to calculate CO2
Technology be used as the standard emissions, and estimated CO2
this alternative is reasonable because it
practice for coal weighing. In cases emissions.
would reduce the sampling and
where coal supply data are not Coal exporters should report, at the
analyses cost burden on these entities,
available, reporters may estimate the corporate level, the quantity of coal
yet would provide sufficient accuracy
missing quantity of coal supplied, using exported, coal rank or classification
given their relatively small contribution
documentation for the quantity of coal (e.g.anthracite, bituminous, sub-
to total U.S. coal supply. We request
received by end-users or other bituminous, or lignite), name and
comments on this approach.
EPA proposes that all coal importers, recipients. For any periods during MSHA identification number of mine of
coal exporters, and reclaimers of waste which mine scales are not operational or origin, country of destination, mine-
coal use any of three above approaches records are unavailable, estimates of specific measured values of coal carbon
for estimating carbon content based on coal production at the mine may be content or HHV that are used to
measurements per shipment in place of estimated using an average of values of calculate CO2 emissions, and estimated
daily measurements if preferred. We production immediately preceding and CO2 emissions (metric tons CO2/yr).
seek comment on this measurement following the missing data period, or Waste coal reclaimers should report,
approach. other standard industry practices, such at the facility level, the quantity of coal
We propose that the ASTM Method as estimating the volume of coal recovered or reclaimed (tons/yr), coal
D5373 should be used as the standard transported by rail cars and coal density rank or classification (e.g., anthracite,
for all ultimate analyses. to estimate total coal weight in tons. For bituminous, sub-bituminous, or lignite),
We considered, but are not additional background information on name of mine of origin, state of origin,
recommending, an option to allow all coal weighing, please refer to the mine-specific measured values of coal
coal mines to use default coal carbon Suppliers of Coal TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR– carbon content or HHV that are used to
content values instead of site-specific 2008–0508–037). calculate CO2 emissions, and estimated
values or measurements. Existing In cases where carbon content or HHV CO2 emissions.
information available on the variability measurements are missing, reporters A full list of data to be reported is
of carbon content for coal from USGS, may estimate the missing value based contained in the rule. These data to be
the U.S. GHG Inventory, EIA’s GHG on an weighted average value for the reported form the basis of calculating
Inventory, and the IPCC indicate that previous seven days. potential CO2 emissions associated with
default values introduce considerable the total supply of coal into the U.S.
5. Selection of Data Reporting
uncertainty into the emissions economy. Therefore, these data are
Requirements
calculation. Given the large share of necessary for us to understand the
total GHG emissions represented by use We propose that coal mines, coal emissions data and to verify the
of coal in the U.S. economy, we view importers, coal exporters, and waste reasonableness of the reported
the direct measurement or estimation of coal reclaimers each report to us emissions.
site-specific carbon content values as annually on the CO2 emissions that We considered, but are not proposing
necessary. We seek comment on an would result from complete combustion an option in which we would obtain
appropriate approach for reporters— or oxidation of coal produced during the facility-specific data for coal production
such as importers—who estimate a previous calendar year. through access to existing Federal
Government reporting databases, such liquids, as well as emissions generated facilities proposed in the U.S.96 Given
as those maintained by MSHA. We have in the production of coal-based liquids, that conversion of coal to liquids is a
determined that comparability and are addressed in other sections of the highly energy intensive process that is
consistency in reporting processes preamble, particularly Section V.C of viable only on a large scale, we propose
across all facilities included in the this preamble (General Stationary Fuel that any coal-to-liquids facility
entire rule is vital, particularly with Combustion Sources), Section V.D operating in the U.S. would be required
respect to timing of submission, (Electricity Generation), and Section to report.
reporting formats, QA/QC, database V.FF (Underground Coal Mines). We also propose that all importers
management, missing data procedures, and exporters of coal-based liquids
The output fuels from coal-to-liquids report under this rule. While the
transparency and access to information,
processes are compositionally similar to number of existing importers and
and recordkeeping. In addition, EPA’s
standard petroleum-based products e.g., exporters is very small in comparison to
methodological approach requires
gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel, light gases importers and exporters of petroleum
information that is not currently
etc. The most common processes for products, importers of coal-based
reported to Federal agencies, such as
facility-specific information on coal converting coal to liquids are direct and liquids would be required to track fuel
quality (e.g., coal carbon content or indirect liquefaction. In the direct quantities as part of routine business
heating value). process, coal is processed directly to operations, and report to DOE and other
liquid. In the indirect process, coal is Federal agencies.
6. Selection of Records That Must Be first gasified, and then liquefied. For further information, see the Coal
Retained to Liquids TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–
Once manufactured, the supply chain
A full list of records that must be for coal-based liquids to consumers is 0508–038). For specific information on
retained onsite is included in proposed basically the same as it is for refined costs, including unamortized first year
40 CFR part 98, subparts A and KK. EPA petroleum products. Liquid fuels are capital expenditures, please refer to
proposes that the following records moved from the manufacturing facility section 4 of the RIA and the RIA cost
specific to suppliers of coal be kept to a terminal, at which point they may appendix.
onsite: Daily production of coal, annual be blended or mixed with other 3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring
weighted average of coal carbon content products, before entering the Methods
values (if measured), annual weighted downstream distribution chain. We are proposing that producers,
average of coal HHV, calibration records Imported coal-based liquids would enter importers, and exporters of coal-based
of any instruments used onsite (e.g., if the U.S. in the same way that refined liquids calculate potential CO2
coal analyses are done onsite), and and semi-refined petroleum products emissions associated with coal-based
calibration records of scales or other enter the country. In determining the liquids on the basis of a mass balance
equipment used to weigh coal. most appropriate point in the supply approach. Under this approach, CO2
These records consist of data that are chain of coal-based liquids, we followed emissions would be determined by
directly used to calculate the potential the decision-making process applied to applying a carbon content value to the
CO2 emissions reported. We have suppliers of petroleum products quantity of each coal-based liquid
concluded that these records are
discussed in Section V.MM of this supplied. The formulae are simple and
necessary to enable verification that the
preamble, and selected coal-to-liquids can be automated. For carbon content,
GHG emissions monitoring and
facilities (analogous to refineries), and reporters can either use the default CO2
calculation were done correctly.
importers and exporters. For further emission factors for standard petroleum-
LL. Suppliers of Coal-Based Liquid Fuels information, see the Coal to Liquids based fuels in proposed 40 CFR part 98,
TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–038). subpart MM or develop their own
We request comment on the approach of factors.97 Reporters that choose to
We are proposing to include facilities establishing a separate source category substitute their own batch- or facility-
that produce coal-based liquids as well and subpart for suppliers of coal-based specific values for density and carbon
as importers and exporters of coal-based liquids, and the selection of coal-to- share of individual coal-based liquids,
liquids in this source category. Owners liquids facilities and corporate and develop their own CO2 emission
and operators of coal-to-liquids importers and exporters of coal-based factors, must do so according to the
facilities, or ‘‘producers’’, importers, liquids. We also request comment on proposed ASTM standards and
and exporters would report on the CO2 whether or not importers of liquid-based procedures discussed in proposed 40
emissions that would result from fuels are likely to have the necessary CFR part 98, subpart MM. While carbon
complete combustion or oxidation of the information with which to distinguish content of coal-based liquids may differ
quantities of coal-based liquids supplied coal-based liquids from conventional from petroleum products, we believe the
to or exported from the U.S. economy. petroleum-based liquids. default emission factors for petroleum
Producers would report at the facility products in proposed 40 CFR part 98,
level; importers and exporters would 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold subpart MM can be used for estimating
report at the corporate level. emissions from coal-based liquids. We
The carbon in coal-based liquids In developing the threshold for
request comment on this approach, the
would already be captured in the suppliers of coal-based liquids, EPA appropriateness of the proposed default
reporting from domestic coal suppliers considered the emissions-based CO2 emission factors, and ways to
and importers, but we believe that it is threshold of 1,000 metric tons CO2e, improve these default values. We also
important for climate policy 10,000 metric tons CO2e, 25,000 metric
development to have additional tons CO2e and 100,000 metric tons CO2e 96 Coal Conversion—Pathway to Alternate Fuels.
information on a unique and potentially per year, but was limited by the fact that C. Lowell Miller. 2007 EIA Energy Outlook
growing source of liquid fuels. As there are very few existing facilities. Modeling and Data Conference. Washington, DC,
According to DOE, there is one facility March 28, 2007.
discussed in Sections III and IV of this 97 For a discussion of the benefits and
preamble, emissions resulting from the operating in the world, one U.S. facility disadvantages of default carbon factors versus direct
combustion and other uses of coal-based in the engineering phase, and thirteen measurement see Section V.MM.3 of this preamble.
request comment on the appropriateness components of their petroleum products • Home heating oil.
of the proposed sampling and analysis as well as NGLs they supply to the • Residual fuel oil.
standards and methods for developing economy, and refiners would be • Petrochemical feedstocks.
batch- or facility-specific CO2 emission required to report on certain types of • Asphalt.
factors, especially the methods for feedstock entering their facility. Refiners • Petroleum coke.
determining carbon share. would report at the facility level, and • Lubricants and waxes.
importers would report at the corporate Reporting Parties. When considering
4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating the extent of the definition of this
level. Exporters of petroleum products
Missing Data source category and who should be
are also included in this source category
We have determined that the in order for us to appropriately account required to report under this rule, our
information to be reported by suppliers for petroleum products that are approach was first to identify all parties
of coal-based liquids is routinely produced but not consumed in the U.S. within the petroleum product supply
collected by facilities and entities as and therefore do not result in direct CO2 chain. We considered parties that
part of standard operating practices, and emissions in the U.S. Exporters would function primarily in upstream
therefore 100 percent data availability report on the petroleum products and petroleum production, such as oil
would be required. Typically, coal- NGLs they export, including the drillers and well owners, as well as
based liquids would be metered directly biomass components of the petroleum petroleum refiners and importers of
at multiple stages. In cases where products, at the corporate level. refined and semi-refined products. We
metered data are not available, reporters End users of petroleum products are also considered parties located even
may estimate the missing volumes based addressed in other sections of this further downstream, such as terminal
on contracted maximum daily quantities preamble, such as Section V.C (General operators, oxygenate blenders of
and known conditions of receipt and Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources), transportation fuel, blenders of
delivery during the period when data and direct, onsite emissions at blendstock, transmix processors, and
are missing. petroleum refineries are covered in retail gas station owners. In addition, we
Section V.Y of this preamble. considered pipeline owners and
5. Selection of Data Reporting operators.
Requirements The total estimated GHG emissions
resulting from the combustion of As discussed earlier in this preamble,
We propose that producers, importers, petroleum products in the U.S. in 2006 one of our objectives when determining
and exporters report CO2 emissions was 2,417 million metric tons CO2e, which entities would fall within a
directly to EPA on an annual basis. according to the 2008 U.S. GHG source category was to identify logical
Suppliers would report potential CO2 Inventory. It is estimated that 75 percent data reporting points or groups of
emissions disaggregated by fuel types. of the combustion-related CO2 facilities that were relatively small in
We considered but did not propose an emissions from petroleum use in the number but that could provide a
option in which we would obtain U.S. comes from the transportation comprehensive set of data for the
facility-specific data for coal-based sector. The next largest sector is particular source category. Of all the
liquids through access to existing industrial use (15 percent), and the parties that make up the petroleum
Federal government reporting databases, commercial, residential, and electricity products supply chain, we have
such as those maintained by EIA. EPA concluded that petroleum refiners 98
generation sectors make up the
believes that comparability and and importers and exporters of semi-
remainder.
consistency in reporting processes Petroleum products are ultimately refined and refined petroleum products
across all facilities included in the consumed in one of two ways: Either are the most appropriate parties to
entire rule are vital, particularly with through combustion for energy use, or report to EPA under this source category
respect to timing of submission, through a non-energy use such as and that the data they can report would
reporting formats, QA/QC, database petrochemical feedstocks or lubricants. be comprehensive.
management, missing data procedures, Combustion of petroleum products There are approximately 150
transparency and access to information, operating petroleum refineries in the
produces CO2 and lesser amounts of
and recordkeeping. U.S. and its territories. Our thresholds
CH4 and N2O, which are in almost all
6. Selection of Records That Must Be cases emitted directly into the analysis in Section V.MM.2 of this
Retained atmosphere. Some non-energy uses of preamble, however, only reflects data on
fuels, such as lubricants, also result in the 140 refineries that reported
A full list of records that must be atmospheric distillation capacity to EIA
retained onsite is included in proposed oxidation of carbon and CO2 emissions.
This process may occur immediately (at DOE) in 2006. Petroleum products
40 CFR part 98, subparts A and LL. from these refineries account for
upon first use or, in the case of
MM. Suppliers of Petroleum Products biological deterioration, over time. approximately 90 percent of U.S.
Carbon in other petroleum products, consumption. Given the coverage
1. Definition of the Source Category provided by a relatively small number
such as asphalts and durable plastics,
We are proposing that refineries as may remain un-oxidized for long of facilities, we propose that all refiners
well as importers and exporters of periods unless burned as fuel or be subject to the reporting requirements
petroleum products be included in this incinerated as waste. for petroleum product suppliers and
source category. Owners or operators of The following list, while not that they report to EPA on a facility-by-
petroleum refineries, or ‘‘refiners,’’ and comprehensive, illustrates the types of facility basis. For refiners that trade
importers that introduce petroleum products that EPA considers to fall semi-refined and refined petroleum
products into the U.S. economy would under the category of petroleum products between facilities, leading to a
be required to report on the CO2 products:
emissions associated with the complete • Motor vehicle and nonroad gasoline 98 A petroleum refinery is any facility engaged in
combustion or oxidation of their producing gasoline, kerosene, distillate fuel oils,

and diesel fuels. residual fuel oils, lubricants, asphalt (bitumen) or
petroleum products. Additionally, both • Jet fuel and kerosene. other products through distillation of petroleum or
refiners and importers would be • Aviation gasoline. through redistillation, cracking, or reforming of
required to report on biomass • Propane and other LPGs. unfinished petroleum derivatives.
possible risk of double-counting in petroleum products combusted or below for petroleum suppliers, due to a
coverage, we are proposing a straight- consumed in the U.S. and can obtain longstanding accounting convention
forward accounting method in Section information on such products on a more adopted by the IPCC, the UNFCCC, the
V.MM.5 of this preamble to address this aggregated basis directly from refiners U.S. GHG Inventory, and many other
possibility. and importers, we are proposing to State and regional GHG reporting
To account for refined and semi- exclude retail gas station owners and programs where emissions of CO2 from
refined petroleum products that are not oxygenate blenders from reporting the combustion of renewable fuels are
produced at U.S. refineries, we are under this rule. distinguished from emissions of CO2
proposing to include importers under We are not proposing to include
from combustion of petroleum or other
this source category. Importers currently operators of terminals or pipelines,
fossil-based products. Under such
report to EPA on petroleum products blenders of blendstocks, or transmix
designated for transportation or non- processors in this source category convention, potential emissions from
road mobile end-uses. This rule would because we believe that refiners and the combustion of biomass-based fuels
include all importers regardless of end- importers can provide comprehensive are accounted for at the time of
use designations. The number of information on petroleum products feedstock harvest, collection, or
importing companies varies from year to supplied in the U.S. with a lower risk disposal, not at the point of fuel
year, but it is typically on the order of of double-counting petroleum products. combustion. Nonetheless, we seek
100 to 200. A given quantity of refined or semi- comment on this approach.
We are also proposing to include refined petroleum product may pass Certain petroleum products can be co-
under this source category exporters of between multiple terminals and processed or blended with renewable
refined and semi-refined petroleum blending facilities, so asking terminal or fuels. We are proposing a method in
products in order to have information pipeline operators, blenders of Section V.MM.5 of this preamble
on petroleum products that are blendstock, or transmix processors to whereby petroleum product suppliers
produced but not consumed in the U.S. report information on incoming and report data that allows EPA to
The rationale to include reporting from outgoing products would likely result in distinguish between the biomass and
exporters is to be able to account for unreliable data for estimating GHG
petroleum products that are consumed fossil fuel-based carbon in their
emissions from petroleum products.99
in other countries and that do not Liquid fossil fuel products can be products.
contribute to direct CO2 emissions in derived from feedstocks other than 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
the U.S. petroleum crude, such as coal and
Many refiners are also importers and natural gas. Suppliers of coal-based In assessing the appropriateness of
exporters of petroleum products. EPA is products are covered under Section applying a threshold to refiners (at the
proposing that such refiners separately V.LL of this preamble, Suppliers of facility level) and importers (at the
report data on the petroleum products Coal-Based Liquid Fuels. Primary corporate level), we calculated the
that they produce on a facility-by- suppliers of natural gas-based products volume of finished gasoline that would
facility basis and report at a corporate are covered in Section V.NN of this contain enough carbon that, when
level the petroleum products they preamble, Suppliers of Natural Gas and combusted or oxidized, would produce
import or export. The rationale for this Natural Gas Liquids. We are proposing 1,000 metric tons CO2e, 10,000 metric
separate reporting is that we are to require all reporters in this source tons CO2e, 25,000 metric tons CO2e, and
generally proposing coverage at the category to report data on the NGLs they 100,000 metric tons CO2e. We took the
facility level where feasible (e.g., supply to or export from the economy volume of finished gasoline as an
refineries) and proposing corporate because these products may not example of how much of a refined or
reporting only where facility-level currently be captured under Section semi-refined product would result in a
coverage may not be feasible (e.g., V.NN of this preamble, Suppliers of given level of CO2 emissions. These data
importers and exporters). In addition, Natural Gas and NGLs. The natural-gas
are summarized in Table MM–1 of this
the separation simplifies reporting in related reporting requirements are
cases where a company that owns or preamble.
discussed in Section V.MM.5 of this
operates multiple refineries may have a preamble.
consolidated arrangement for imports of This section of the preamble is TABLE MM–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS
refined and semi-refined products focused on suppliers of petroleum FOR FINISHED GASOLINE
destined for its refineries and for other products, so EPA is not proposing to
consumers, or for exports. include primary 100 suppliers of Total volume
Threshold level metric tons
We considered but are not proposing of gasoline
renewable fuels, such as fuel derived CO2/yr bbls/yr
to include parties that are involved in from biomass like grains, animal fats
upstream petroleum production. We and oils, or waste, under this source 1,000 ..................................... 2,564
believe the number of domestic oil category. However, as described in 10,000 ................................... 25,641
drillers and well owners is prohibitively Section IV.B of this preamble (Reporting 25,000 ................................... 64,103
large and represents only a portion of by fuel and industrial gas suppliers), we 100,000 ................................. 256,410
the amount of crude petroleum that is note that we are not proposing to
processed into finished products to be require suppliers of biomass-based fuels Based on the calculations in Table
used in the U.S. to report on their products anywhere
We are not proposing to include retail MM–1 of this preamble and data on the
under this rule, except as discussed annual volume of petroleum products
gas station owners and oxygenate
blenders to report to EPA as suppliers 99 See Section V.MM.3 of this preamble regarding
that refiners and importers are currently
of petroleum products. Retail gas station a method for accounting for trade between reporting to the EIA, EPA estimated the
owners and oxygenate blenders mostly refineries. number of refineries and importers that
handle transportation fuel and fuel used
100 Refiners, exporters, and importers of
would meet each of the four selected
petroleum products could, in some cases, be threshold levels. The results of this
in small engines. Because we are suppliers of renewable fuels but their supply of
interested in GHG emissions from all renewable fuels is not the focus of this subpart. analysis are summarized below.
Refineries. Data on the typical refineries (see Table MM–2 of this and therefore would also exceed the
production levels for refineries 101 preamble). This conclusion is based on thresholds for all products combined.
demonstrate that each of the thresholds the result that all refineries would For this reason, we are proposing to
considered would cover all domestic exceed the thresholds for gasoline alone, cover all petroleum refineries.
TABLE MM–2. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR REFINERIES

Threshold level metric tons emissions 1 2 met- Total number
CO2e/yr of facilities 3
ric tons CO2/yr Metric tons CO2/yr Percent Number Percent
1,000 ............................................ 2,447,738,368 140 2,447,738,368 100 140 100

10,000 .......................................... 2,447,738,368 140 2,447,738,368 100 140 100
25,000 .......................................... 2,447,738,368 140 2,447,738,368 100 140 100
100,000 ........................................ 2,447,738,368 140 2,447,738,368 100 140 100
1 These constitute total emissions from all petroleum products ex refinery gate. The total includes only CO2 emissions.
2 Estimated CO2 emissions for all refineries are based on applying product-specific default carbon contents to production of each product.
3 This number represents the total number of refineries that reported atmospheric distillation capacity to EIA in 2006.
Small Refiners. In recent EPA fuel temporary exemptions for small data on the amount and types of
rulemakings, we have provided refiners. We do not believe complying petroleum products is information that
temporary exemptions from our with this rule will require additional all importers maintain as part of their
regulations for small refiners, defined as resources that might put small refiners normal business operations. Therefore
producers of transportation fuel from at an unfair disadvantage. All refiners we believe the burden of reporting the
crude oil that employed an average of would already be reporting data to EPA, required information listed in Section
1,500 people or fewer over a given one- regardless of size, because all refineries V.MM.5 of this preamble is minimal
year period and with a corporate- meet the proposed reporting threshold since no additional monitoring
average crude oil capacity of 155,000 in proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart Y equipment has to be installed to comply
barrels per calendar day or less. Such for direct onsite emissions. with this rule. In addition, the quantity
small refiner exemptions were provided Importers. Data on importers of of products imported by a company may
to allow small refiners extra time to petroleum products in 2006, the most vary greatly from year to year.
meet standards or comply with new recent year available, show that 78 Furthermore, our proposed definition
regulations. This exemption was based percent of the importing companies for petroleum products for importers
on an assumption that to require small exceeded the 25,000 metric tons CO2e/ and exporters in Subpart A excludes
refiners to comply with new regulations yr reporting threshold and that some asphalt and road oil, lubricants, waxes,
on the same schedule as larger refiners importing companies did not meet the plastics, and plastic products. For these
would put them at a disadvantage if 1,000 metric tons CO2e/yr threshold (see reasons, we are proposing that all
required to seek the same capital and Table MM–3 of this preamble). While 22 importers of petroleum products be
administrative resources being sought percent of importers supplied less than required to report to EPA, and we seek
by their larger competitors. Because of the amount of products that, when comment on our proposed definition of
the nature of this reporting rule, combusted or oxidized, would have petroleum products as it applies to
however, we are not proposing any resulted in 25,000 metric tons CO2/yr, importers.
TABLE MM–3. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR IMPORTERS

Total national Emissions covered Companies covered
emissions 1 Total number
Threshold level metric tons CO2e/yr metric tons of importers Metric tons Percent Number Percent
CO2/yr CO2/yr
<1000 ................................................................... 393,294,390 224 393,294,390 100 224 100

1,000 .................................................................... 393,294,390 224 393,291,916 >99.9 219 98
10,000 .................................................................. 393,294,390 224 393,171,144 >99.9 193 86
25,000 .................................................................. 393,294,390 224 392,895,841 99.9 175 78
100,000 ................................................................ 393,294,390 224 389,628,252 99 120 54
1 These constitute total emissions from all product imports. Analysis is based on EIA’s Company Reports for 2006.
Exporters. Due to the limited minimal. Considering this information and exporters in Subpart A excludes
availability of export data, EPA did not and the importance of being able to asphalt and road oil, lubricants, waxes,
conduct a threshold analysis for account for petroleum products plastics, and plastic products. We seek
petroleum products exporters. However, produced but not combusted or comment on this proposal.
based on the type of information that oxidized in the U.S., EPA is proposing De Minimis Exports and Imports. We
exporters must maintain as part of their that all exporters report on their are seeking comment on whether or not
normal business operations, we believe exported petroleum products. to establish a de minimis level, either in
that the incremental burden of reporting Furthermore, our proposed definition terms of total product volume or
this information to EPA would be for petroleum products for importers potential CO2 emissions, to eliminate
101 To simplify our reporting threshold analysis, definition of a petroleum supplier but did not
EPA omitted roughly 10 refineries that meet our report any atmospheric distillation capacity to EIA.
any reporting burden for parties that Carbon content determination. To would be required to sample each
may import or export a small amount of translate data on petroleum product, product monthly for the reporting year
petroleum products on an annual basis. NGLs, and biomass types and quantities and to test the composite sample at the
We also note that in the proposed rule into estimated potential GHG emissions, end of the reporting period using ASTM
some importers and exporters may not it is necessary either to estimate or D1298 (2003), ASTM D1657–02(2007),
be required to report their onsite measure the carbon content for each ASTM D4052–96(2002)el, ASTM
combustion, process, and/or fugitive product type. For this proposal, we D5002–99(2005), or ASTM D5004–
emissions under other sections of the reviewed the existing CO2 emission 89(2004)el for density, as appropriate,
proposed rule because their combined factors developed by EIA and used in and ASTM D5291(2005) or ASTM
emissions do not meet the applicable the U.S. GHG Inventory, and we D6729–(2004)el for carbon share, as
thresholds. researched the sampling and test appropriate (see Suppliers of Petroleum
For a full discussion of the threshold methods that would be required for Products TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–
analysis, please refer to the Suppliers of direct measurement of carbon content 0508–039)). For suppliers of seasonal
Petroleum Products TSD (EPA–HQ– by reporters. gasoline, reporters would be required to
OAR–2008–0508–039). For specific We also considered the benefits and take a sample each month of the season
information on costs, including disadvantages of using default carbon and test the composite sample at the
unamortized first year capital content factors and of using direct end of the season.
expenditures, please refer to section 4 of measurements of carbon content. We request comment on this
the RIA and the RIA cost appendix. Default CO2 emission factors have been approach. We request comment on
used extensively in the U.S. GHG whether reporters should be allowed to
Inventory, in inventories of other combine default CO2 emission factors to
Methods
nations, and in corporate reporting develop alternative factors for fuel
Rather than directly measuring guidance; they are simple and cost reformulations according to the volume
emissions from the combustion or effective for evaluating GHG emissions percent of each fuel component, and if
consumption of their products, from common classes of biomass and so using what methodology. We also
suppliers of petroleum products would fossil fuel types (e.g., ethanol, motor request comment on the appropriateness
need to estimate the potential emissions gasoline, jet fuel, distillate fuel, etc). It and adequacy of the proposed default
of their non-crude feedstocks and is also possible to combine default CO2 CO2 emission factors—including factors
products based on volume and emission factors to develop alternative for biomass products—and ways to
characteristic information. Therefore factors for fuel reformulations by improve these default values. For full
product volume metering and sampling averaging according to weight. Some documentation of the derivation of the
would be of utmost importance to products, however, can have multiple proposed default factors, please refer to
accurately calculate potential CO2 chemical compositions due to different the Suppliers of Petroleum Products
emissions. feedstock, blending components, and/or TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–039).
Volume measurement. EPA is refinery processes, which can lead to In addition, we request comment on
proposing to require specific industry- variations in carbon content. Default the appropriateness of the proposed
standard test methods for flow meters CO2 emission factors for common sampling and analysis standards and
and tank gauges for measuring volumes chemical compositions of common methods for developing CO2 emission
of feedstocks and products. For ultra- products cannot account for the full factors for petroleum products and
sonic flow meters, we propose to require variability of carbon content in NGLs, especially the methods for
the test method described in AGA petroleum, natural gas, and biomass determining carbon share. Specifically,
Report No. 9 (2007); for turbine meters, products. we seek comment on specific ASTM or
American National Standards Institute, Direct measurements would provide other industry standards that would be
ANSI/ASME MFC–4M–1986; for orifice the most accurate determination of more appropriate for sampling
meters, American National Standards carbon content. It is relatively petroleum products and NGLs to
Institute, ANSI/API 2530 (also called expensive, however, to design and determine carbon share. Finally, we
AGA–3) (1991); and for coriolis meters, implement a program for regular request comment on potential methods
ASME MFC–11 (2006). For tank gauges, sampling and testing for carbon content to determine carbon share of biomass
we propose to require the following test across the variety of products produced products.
methods: API–2550: Measurements and at refineries. Many products are The various approaches to monitoring
Calibration of Petroleum Storage Tanks homogeneous because they must meet GHG emissions are elaborated in the
(1965), API MPMS 2.2: A Manual of ‘‘minimum’’ specifications (e.g., jet Suppliers of Petroleum Products TSD
Petroleum Measurement Standards fuel), and the use of direct (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–039).
(1995), or API–653: Tank Inspection, measurements may not lead to
Repair, Alteration and Reconstruction, noticeable improvements in accuracy 4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating
3rd edition (2008). over default CO2 emission factors. Missing Data
We propose that all flow meters and Based on this information, we are Under this proposal, we are
tank gauges must be calibrated prior to proposing that for purposes of suggesting methods for estimating data
monitoring under this rule using a estimating emissions, reporters could that may be missing from different
method published by a consensus either use the default CO2 emission source categories for various reasons.
standards organization (e.g., ASTM, factors for each product type published Petroleum product suppliers would
ASME, American Petroleum Institute, or in proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart need to estimate any missing data on the
NAESB), or using calibration procedures MM or, in the case of petroleum amount of petroleum products or NGLs
specified by the flow meter products and NGLs, develop their own supplied or exported, and the quantity
manufacturer. Product flow meters and factors. Reporters that choose to of the crude and non-crude feedstocks,
tank gauges would be required to be substitute their own values for density including biomass, consumed. In most
recalibrated either annually or at the and carbon share of individual cases, the source category would be
minimum frequency specified by the petroleum products and NGLs, and missing data due to monitoring
manufacturer. develop their own CO2 emission factors equipment malfunction or shutdown.
We have determined that the data, such as penetration of control case of refiners, or corporate entity, in
information to be reported by petroleum technologies and distance traveled for the case of importers and exporters.
fuel suppliers is collected as part of on-highway mobile sources.103 We seek This information underlies the proposed
standard operating practices, and expect comment on whether or not EPA should CO2 emissions calculations. By focusing
that any missing data would be use the national inventory estimates of on petroleum products sold versus
negligible. Typically, products are CH4 and N2O emissions from petroleum produced, we would avoid double-
metered directly at multiple stages, and product combustion and apportion them counting products, especially semi-
billing systems require rigorous to individual petroleum product refined products, that would either be
reconciliation of data. In cases where suppliers based on the quantity of their used onsite by the facility to generate
metered data are not available, we are product. energy or that would be reused as a
proposing that reporting parties may Data related to products supplied to feedstock at some point in the facility’s
estimate the missing volumes based or exported from the economy. We are production process.
either on the last valid data point they proposing that petroleum product We are not proposing that petroleum
recorded or on an average of two valid suppliers use a mass-balance method to product suppliers collect new
data points based on their established calculate CO2 emissions, which is used information on those petroleum
procedures for purposes of product extensively in national GHG inventories products which may be used or
tracking and billing. We seek comment and in existing reporting guidelines for converted by other entities into long-
on the appropriateness and adequacy of facilities, companies, and states, such as lived products that are not oxidized or
our proposed procedures for estimating the WRI/WBCSD GHG Protocol.104 The combusted, or oxidized slowly over long
missing data. Petroleum product mass balance approach is based on periods of time (e.g., plastics). A
suppliers reporting under this rule readily available information: The comprehensive and rigorous system for
would be required to keep sufficient volume of fuel, which is typically tracking the fate of non-energy
records to verify any volume estimates tracked by suppliers, and the carbon petroleum products and their various
(see Section V.MM.6 of this preamble). content of the fuel, i.e., mass of carbon end-uses is beyond the scope of this
per volume of fuel (the carbon content rule, and would require a much more
5. Selection of Data Reporting of the petroleum product is also referred burdensome reporting obligation for
Requirements to as the CO2 emission factor). The petroleum product suppliers. However,
We are proposing that suppliers of formula to apply this method is simple at some point, we may need to address
petroleum products be required to and can be automated.105 Carbon the question of non-emissive end uses of
report the type, volume, and CO2 content, where not measured directly, petroleum products as part of future
emissions associated with the complete can be estimated using other readily climate policy development. We request
combustion or oxidation of each available data and literature values. comment on our proposal to require
individual petroleum product and NGL There is substantial trade and transfer petroleum product suppliers to report
they supply to the economy, export, or of products between refiners, between the CO2 emissions associated with
use as a feedstock annually. We are also importers and refiners, and between products that could potentially have
proposing to require reporting on the other parties. The products supplied by non-emissive end-uses. We also request
total CO2 emissions of all products they one refiner might in some cases serve as comment on ways in which non-
supply to the economy annually, minus the feedstock for another refiner. To emissive end-uses could be tracked and
any emissions associated with non- avoid double-counting of emissions, we reported.
crude feedstocks, including biomass, are proposing an elaboration of the Data related to crude feedstocks. We
and renewable fuel blended in a mass-balance approach for use by are proposing that refiners report basic
petroleum product. Additionally, we are refiners. Under this elaborated information to EPA on the crude oil
proposing to require refiners to report approach, to account for the fact that feedstock type, API gravity, sulfur
information on the volume, API gravity, any non-crude feedstock 106 entering a content and country of origin during the
sulfur content, and country of origin of refiner’s facility would have already reporting period. This basic information
each crude oil batch used as feedstock been reported by the non-crude on the feedstock characteristics would
at a refinery. Finally, we are proposing feedstock’s source (such as an importer provide useful information to EPA to
to require reporting on the volume of or another refiner), the refiner would assess the lifecycle GHG emissions
diesel fuel that is most likely to be used measure and report the potential CO2 associated with petroleum refining.
in the onroad mobile source sector. emissions from the non-crude feedstock, Data related to non-crude petroleum
The only GHG required to be reported but then subtract the amount from the and natural gas feedstocks. As
under proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart overall CO2 emissions they report. discussed previously, in order to
MM is CO2. Combustion of petroleum We are proposing that suppliers minimize double-counting of non-crude
products may also lead to trace report to EPA the types of products and petroleum products and NGLs, we
quantities of CH4 and N2O emissions.102 quantities of products sold during the would require refiners to report the
The amounts of CH4 and N2O are reporting period or otherwise volume and CO2 emissions of any non-
dependent on factors other than fuel transferred to another facility, in the crude petroleum and natural gas
characteristics such as combustion feedstock that was acquired from an
temperatures, air-fuel mixes, and use of
103 2008 U.S. GHG Inventory, Annex 3— outside facility. We are not proposing to
pollution control equipment. These
Methodological Descriptions for Additional Source require reporting of products produced
or Sink Categories. pp. A–106 to A–120. at the facility and recycled back into
other factors vary significantly across 104 See The Greenhouse Gas Protocol (GHG
and within the major categories of Protocol) http://www.ghgprotocol.org/; the 2008

processing. In the event that a reporter
petroleum product end-uses. EPA bases U.S. Inventory http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ cannot determine whether a feedstock is
national estimates of CH4 and N2O for
emissions/downloads/08_Energy.pdf, and the 2006 petroleum-or natural gas-based, we are
IPCC Guidelines http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/ proposing to have the reporter assume
the U.S. GHG Inventory on bottom-up public/2006gl/vol2.html.
105 The generic formula is CO = Fuel Quantity *
the product is petroleum-based. We
2
102 CO , CH and N O emissions from combustion Carbon Content * 44/12. request comment on methods for
2 4 2
of petroleum products were 1900, 3.1, and 34.1 106 This could include both petroleum- and distinguishing between natural gas- and
million metric tons CO2e, respectively. natural gas-based products. petroleum-based feedstock.
Data related to co-processed biomass proposed approach towards biomass report the same information multiple
and blended biomass-based fuels. We reporting. times to the Federal government.
are proposing to require reporters to Carbon Content. We are proposing However, we have concluded that
provide information on the biogenic that petroleum product suppliers that comparability and consistency in
portion of petroleum products under directly measure the batch-or facility- reporting processes across all facilities
two circumstances discussed below. We specific density or carbon share of their included in the entire rule is vital,
are proposing these reporting products report the density and carbon particularly with respect to timing of
requirements to ensure that EPA can content values along with the testing submission, reporting formats, QA/QC,
distinguish between potential emissions and sampling standards they use for database management, missing data
of carbon from biogenic sources (i.e., each product.107 We are not proposing procedures, transparency and access to
biomass) and from non-biogenic sources that reporters that choose to use the information, and recordkeeping. In
(i.e., fossil fuel). We believe it is default carbon content values provided addition, all refineries would be
important to make this distinction in the proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart reporting emissions from petroleum
because CO2 emissions from biogenic MM be required to report these values refining processes under proposed 40
sources are traditionally accounted for since they can easily be back-calculated CFR part 98, subpart Y. Finally, as noted
at the time of harvest, collection, or with data on volume and CO2 above, we are requesting readily
disposal, rather than the point of fuel emissions. available information from petroleum
combustion. Designated End-use. Although not product suppliers and do not consider
First, we are proposing to require required as a direct input to the mass- reporting information to more than one
refiners to report information related to balance equation for estimating total Federal agency an undue burden for
biomass that is co-processed with a emissions, EPA is also interested in these industries. We thus considered
petroleum feedstock (crude or non- collecting data on designated end-use but are not proposing an option in
crude) to produce a product that would (such as for use in a highway vehicle which EPA obtains facility-specific data
be supplied to the economy. We versus a stationary boiler) of petroleum for suppliers of petroleum products
propose that refiners report the volume products for effective policy
through access to existing Federal
of and estimated CO2 emissions government reporting databases, such as
development. EPA recognizes that
associated with both the biomass and those maintained by EIA. However, in
petroleum product suppliers do not
petroleum-based portions of these order to reduce the reporting burden
always have full knowledge of the
products. Refiners would then subtract placed on industry, we would consider
ultimate end-use of their products. We
the estimated CO2 emissions from the information that refiners and importers
evaluated the potential end-uses that
biomass portion from their total CO2 already report to EIA with respect to
petroleum product suppliers could
emissions calculation. We are not units and frequency, for example, when
know, including end-use designations
proposing to require refiners to report crafting the reporting requirements for
required by EPA’s transportation fuel
on CO2 emissions from biomass they refiners, importers, and exporters under
regulations,108 and determined that
combust onsite or co-process with a the final rule.
petroleum feedstock to produce a reporters should be able to identify Reporting to EPA’s Office of
product that they combust onsite; these diesel fuel intended for use on highway Transportation of Air Quality. EPA
emissions are addressed in Section V.Y since it must contain less than 15 ppm currently collects a variety of
of this preamble. of sulfur and should not contain dyes or information associated with the
Second, in the case where a reporter markers associated with nonroad and production and use of most
supplies or exports a petroleum product stationary fuel. We recognize, however, transportation fuels in the U.S. in order
that is blended with a biomass-based that some of this fuel may ultimately be to ensure compliance with existing fuel
fuel, we are proposing only to require used in nonroad and stationary sectors. regulations and standards. Over the
CO2 emissions information on the We request comment on this proposal, course of many years, EPA has
petroleum-based portion of the product on the extent to which this and other developed a reporting system for its
along with the volume of the biomass- refinery gate (ex refinery) and importer transportation fuels programs that
based fuel. This reporting requirement end-use designations reflect actual end- incorporates a number of compliance
would also apply to a refiner that use consumption patterns, and other and enforcement mechanisms. For
receives a blended fuel (e.g., gasoline options EPA could pursue to track the example, all reporting parties must
with ethanol) as feedstock to be further combustion-related end-uses of register their facilities with EPA and in
refined or otherwise used onsite. We are petroleum products. many cases use EPA’s dedicated
also assuming that all reporters would Reporting to EIA. We realize that most reporting web portal, the CDX, to submit
know the percent volume of the petroleum product suppliers report their reports. We review reports to
biomass-based component of any much of the relevant fuel quantity identify reporting errors (e.g. incorrect
product. We seek comment on this information to EIA on a monthly, report formats or missing data) but also
assumption and on any necessary quarterly, or annual basis. During require reporting parties to self-report
methods for distinguishing between development of this proposal, EPA any errors or anomalies in their data.
biomass- and petroleum-based consulted with EIA on its existing For some of our existing transportation
components of blended fuels. reporting programs and discussed the fuels reporting programs, we employ the
Under this proposal, we are proposing feasibility of sharing this information use of annual attest engagements, audits
to require reporters to calculate and through an interagency agreement, of the reporting parties’ records by an
report CO2 emissions from products rather than requiring reporting parties to independent certified public accountant
derived from co-processing biomass and or certified internal auditor, to help
petroleum feedstocks outside their 107 Proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart MM ensure that the data submitted in reports
operations as if the products were identifies the specific ASTM standards that to EPA reflect data maintained in the
entirely petroleum-based. We are not reporters must use, but allows discretion for the
reporter to select the most appropriate standard.
reporting parties’ records.
requiring reporters to report information 108 Current regulations require refiners and For purposes of this rule, we are
on products that were derived entirely importers to designate diesel fuel (40 CFR interested in minimizing the additional
from biomass. We seek comment on this 80.598(a)(2)). reporting burden on reporters by
utilizing existing reporting and Combustion and other uses of natural trillion cf delivered to consumers. The
verification systems, such as EPA’s gas are addressed in other subparts, balance of the natural gas is delivered
transportation fuel programs reporting such as proposed 40 CFR part 98, directly to large end users in industry
protocols, as appropriate. We request subpart C (General Fuel Stationary and for power generation. Most of these
comments on ways to take advantage of Combustion Sources). large end users would already be
existing reporting and verification Natural gas is a combustible gaseous included as reporting facilities for direct
programs, particularly those related to mixture of hydrocarbons, mostly CH4. It GHG emissions because their emissions
transportation fuels. Specifically, as is produced from wells drilled into exceed the respective emissions
noted in Section IV.J.3 of this preamble, underground reservoirs of porous rock. threshold for their source category.
we are seeking comment on requiring Natural gas withdrawn from the well LDCs meter the amount of gas they
annual attest engagements for all may contain liquid hydrocarbons and receive and meter and bill for the
reporters under proposed 40 CFR part nonhydrocarbon gases. The natural gas deliveries they make to all end-use
98, subpart MM. In addition, whereas separated from these components at gas customers or other LDCs and pipelines.
the proposed deadline for annual report processing plants is considered ‘‘dry’’. Some of the end-use customers may be
submission is March 31 following the Dry natural gas is also known as large industrial or electricity generating
reporting year for all reporters under consumer-grade natural gas. In 2006, the facilities that would be included under
this rule, we seek comment on an combustion of natural gas for useful other subparts for direct emissions
alternative deadline of February 28 heat and work resulted in 1,155.1 related to stationary combustion. LDCs
following the reporting year for annual million metric tons CO2e emissions out already report their total deliveries to
reports from suppliers of petroleum of a total of 7,054.2 million metric tons DOE as well as to State regulators. There
products. This deadline would align CO2e of GHG emissions in the U.S. are approximately 1,207 LDCs in the
with the submission deadline for annual In addition to being combusted for U.S.109
compliance reports under several energy, natural gas is also consumed for Natural gas processing facilities
existing EPA fuels programs. non-energy uses in the U.S. The non- (defined as any facility that extracts or
energy applications of natural gas are recovers NGLs from natural gas,
6. Selection of Records That Must Be diverse, and include feedstocks for separates individual components of
Retained petrochemical production, ammonia, NGLs using fractionation, or converts
We are proposing that reporters under and other products. In 2006, emissions one form of natural gas liquid into
this source category must maintain all of from non-energy uses of natural gas another form such as butane to
the following records: copies of all were 138 million metric tons CO2e. isobutene using isomerization process)
reports submitted to EPA under this The supply chain for delivering
take raw untreated natural gas from
rule, records documenting the type and natural gas to consumers is complex,
domestic production and strip out the
quantity of petroleum products and involving producers (i.e., wells),
NGLs, and other compounds. The NGLs
NGLs supplied to or exported from the processing plants, storage facilities,
are then sold, and the processed gas is
economy, records documenting the transmission pipelines, LNG terminals,
and local distribution companies. In delivered to transmission pipelines.110
type, characteristics, and quantity of According to EIA, processors generated
purchased feedstocks, including crude developing the proposed rule, we
concluded that inclusion of all natural about 638 million barrels of NGLs, in
oil, LPGs, biomass, and semi-refined 2006, which is 69 percent of NGLs
feedstocks, records documenting the gas suppliers as reporters would not be
practical from an administrative supplied in the U.S. Processors meter
CO2 emissions that would result from the NGLs they produce and deliver to
perspective, nor would it be necessary
complete combustion or oxidation of the pipelines. These data are reported to
for complete coverage of the supply of
petroleum products, NGLs, and DOE.
natural gas. In determining the most
biomass, and sampling and analysis We are not proposing that processing
appropriate point in the supply chain of
records related to all batch-or facility- plants report supply of dry natural gas
natural gas, we applied the following
specific carbon contents developed and to transmission pipelines. While the
criteria: An administratively
used in reporting to EPA. processing industry in 2006 delivered
manageable number of reporting
These records should contain data an estimated 13.8 trillion cf of
facilities; complete coverage of natural
directly used to calculate the emissions processed, pipeline quality gas into the
gas supply as a group of facilities or in
that are reported and are necessary to pipeline system, an estimated 30
combination with facilities reporting
enable verification that the CO2 percent of dry natural gas goes directly
under other subparts of this rule;
emissions monitoring and calculations from production fields to the
minimal irreconcilable double-counting
were done correctly. These records transmission pipelines, completely by-
of natural gas supply; and feasibility of
would also consist of information used passing processing plants. In the interest
monitoring or calculation methods.
to determine the required characteristics Based on these criteria, we are of increasing coverage, we considered
of crude feedstocks. proposing to include LDCs for deliveries but decided not to propose including
NN. Suppliers of Natural Gas and of dry gas, and natural gas processing
109 This number includes all LDCs that report to
Natural Gas Liquids facilities for the supply of NGLs as
EIA on Form 176, and includes separate operating
reporters under this source category. companies owned by a single larger company, as for
1. Definition of the Source Category LDCs receive natural gas from the large example Niagara Mohawk, a LDC in New York,
This subpart would require reporting transmission pipelines and re-deliver owned by National Grid, which also owns other
by facilities and companies that the gas to end users on their systems, or, LDCs in New York and New England. For the
purposes of this rule, LDCs are defined as those
introduce or supply natural gas and in some cases, re-deliver the natural gas companies that distribute natural gas to ultimate
NGLs into the economy (e.g., LDCs). to other LDCs or even other end users and which are regulated as separate
These facilities and companies would transmission pipelines. Importantly, entities by state public utility commissions.
110 This definition of processors does not include
report the CO2 emissions that would LDCs keep records on the amount of
field gathering and boosting stations, and is
result from complete combustion or natural gas delivered to their customers. therefore narrower in scope than the definition
oxidation of the quantities of natural gas In 2006, LDCs delivered about 12.0 provided earlier in the preamble for the oil and gas
and NGLs supplied (e.g., as a fuel). trillion cf or 60 percent of the total 19.9 sector.
production wells producing pipeline meter flows and report these data to EPA requests comment on the
quality natural gas (i.e., not needing DOE, their inclusion as reporters would inclusion of LDCs and processing
significant processing) due to the large introduce significant complications. The plants, and the exclusion of other parts
number of potential facilities affected. U.S. pipeline network is characterized of the natural gas supply and
We considered but are not proposing by interconnectivity, in which natural distribution chain. For additional
to include the approximately 448,641 gas moves through multiple pipelines background information on suppliers of
(in 2006) production wells in the U.S. on its way to the consumers. Given the natural gas, please refer to the Suppliers
as covered facilities. Producers hundreds of receipt and delivery points of Natural Gas and NGLs TSD (EPA–
routinely monitor production to predict and the interconnections with a HQ–OAR–2008–0508–040).
sales, to distribute sales revenues to multiplicity of other pipelines, 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
working interest owners, pay royalties, processing plants, LDCs, and end users,
and pay State severance taxes. These a substantial amount of double-counting In developing the reporting threshold
data are reported regularly to State errors would be introduced. A time- and for LDCs and natural gas processors,
agencies. At the national level, however, resource-intensive administrative effort EPA considered emissions-based
inclusion of producers would be thresholds of 1,000 metric tons CO2e,
by EPA and reporting companies would
administratively difficult and would 10,000 metric tons CO2e, 25,000 metric
be required annually in an attempt to
include many small facilities. EIA tons CO2e and 100,000 metric tons CO2e
correct this double-counting.
collects reports from a subset of larger per year. For natural gas suppliers, these
producers in key States, but relies on We are also not proposing to include thresholds are applied on the amount of
State data to develop comprehensive importers of natural gas as reporting CO2 emissions that would result from
aggregated national statistics. facilities. Natural gas is imported by complete combustion or oxidation of the
We considered but are not proposing land via transmission pipelines natural gas. These thresholds translate
to include interstate and intrastate (primarily from Canada), and as LNG via into 18,281 thousand cf, 182,812
pipelines. Pipeline operators transport a small number of port terminals thousand cf, 457,030 thousand cf, and
almost all of the natural gas consumed (predominantly on the East and Gulf 1,828,120 thousand cf of natural gas,
in the U.S. including both domestically coasts). Imported natural gas ultimately respectively.
produced and imported natural gas. is delivered to consumers by LDCs or Table NN–1 of this preamble
While there are a relatively modest sent directly to high volume consumers illustrates the LDC emissions and
number of transmission pipelines, who would report under other subparts facilities that would be covered under
approximately 160, and the operators of proposed 40 CFR part 98. these various thresholds.
TABLE NN–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR LDCS

Threshold level metric tons CO2e/yr metric tons of facilities Metric tons Percent Number Percent
CO2e/yr CO2e/yr
1,000 ........................................................ 632,100,851 1,207 632,004,022 99.98 1,022 85

10,000 ...................................................... 632,100,851 1,207 630,106,725 99.68 521 43
25,000 ...................................................... 632,100,851 1,207 627,543,971 99.28 365 30
100,000 .................................................... 632,100,851 1,207 619,456,607 98.00 206 17
We propose to include all LDCs as through them. The remaining LDCs Table NN–2 of this preamble
reporters in this source category. Of the already report annual throughput to EIA illustrates the NGL emissions and
approximate 1,207 LDCs, the 25,000 in form EIA 176. Thus, inclusion of all number of processing facilities that
metric tons CO2e threshold would LDC’s does not require collection of new would be covered under these various
capture the 365 largest LDCs and 98 information. Comments on this thresholds.
percent of the natural gas that flows conclusion are requested.
TABLE NN–2. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR NGLS FROM PROCESSING PLANTS

Threshold level metric tons CO2e/yr metric tons of facilities Metric tons Percent Number Percent
CO2e/yr CO2e/yr
1,000 ........................................................ 164,712,077 566 164,704,346 100 466 82

10,000 ...................................................... 164,712,077 566 164,404,207 100 400 71
25,000 ...................................................... 164,712,077 566 163,516,733 99 347 61
100,000 .................................................... 164,712,077 566 157,341,629 96 244 43
We propose there be no reporting shipments, fuel use and losses, and extraction, and the amount of natural
threshold for natural gas processing ending stocks) of NGLs monthly on EIA gas used in processing on an annual
plants. Each natural gas processing Form 816. Processing plants are also basis on EIA Form 64A.
plant is already required to report the required to report the amounts of For a full discussion of the threshold
supply (beginning stocks, receipts, and natural gas processed, NGLs produced, analysis, please refer to the Suppliers of
production) and disposition (input, shrinkage of the natural gas from NGLs Natural Gas and NGLs TSD (EPA–HQ–
OAR–2008–0508–040). For specific LDCs and natural gas processing plants rule because of their onsite stationary
information on costs, including can substitute their own values for combustion or process emissions.112
unamortized first year capital carbon content provided they are Natural gas processing plants would
expenditures, please refer to section 4 of developed according to nationally- report CO2 emissions disaggregated by
the RIA and the RIA cost appendix. accepted ASTM standards for sampling individual components of NGLs
and analysis. extracted and separated, where
We considered but do not propose an applicable. Where raw NGLs are not
Methods
option in which LDCs and natural gas separated into individual components,
Under this subpart, we are proposing plants should report CO2 emissions for
reporting the amount of natural gas and processing plants would be required to
raw NGLs.
NGLs produced or supplied to the sample and analyze natural gas and
We considered but are not proposing
economy annually, as well as the CO2 NGLs periodically to determine the
an option in which EPA obtained
emissions that would result from carbon content. Given the close
facility-specific data for natural gas and
complete oxidation or combustion of correlation between carbon content and
NGLs through access to existing Federal
this quantity of natural gas and NGLs. BTU value of natural gas and NGLs, and government reporting databases, such as
The only GHG required to be reported the availability of BTU information on those maintained by EIA. We have
under this subpart is CO2. Combustion these products, EPA believes that concluded that comparability and
of natural gas and NGLs may also lead periodic sampling and analysis would consistency in reporting processes
to trace quantities of CH4 and N2O impose a cost on facilities but would not across all facilities included in the
emission.111 Because the quantity of result in improved accuracy of reported entire rule is vital, particularly with
CH4 and N2O emissions are small, emissions values. We request comment respect to timing of submission,
highly variable and dependent on on an approach in which natural gas reporting formats, QA/QC, database
technology and operating conditions in suppliers would be required to develop management, missing data procedures,
which the fuel is being consumed facility- and batch-specific carbon transparency and access to information,
(unlike CO2), we are not proposing that contents through periodic sampling and and recordkeeping. In addition, large
natural gas suppliers report on these analysis. The various approaches to natural gas processing plants would
emissions. We seek comment on monitoring GHG emissions are already be included as reporting
whether or not EPA should use the elaborated in the Suppliers of Natural facilities under proposed 40 CFR
national inventory estimates of CH4 and Gas and NGLs TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR– 98.2(a)(2), therefore there is minimal
N2O emissions from natural gas 2008–0508–040). burden in reporting the additional
combustion, and apportion them to information proposed under this
individual natural gas suppliers based 4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating
subpart. Finally, as noted above, we are
on the quantity of their product. We Missing Data
requesting readily available information
request comments on this conclusion. EPA has determined that the from LDCs and natural gas processing
We are proposing that LDCs and information to be reported by LDCs and facilities, and do not consider reporting
natural gas processing plants use a information to more than one Federal
gas processing plants is routinely
mass-balance method to calculate CO2 agency to place an undue burden on
collected by facilities as part of standard
emissions. The mass balance approach these industries.
operating practices, and expects that
is based on readily available
any missing data would be negligible. 6. Selection of Records That Must Be
information: The quantity of fuel (e.g.,
Typically, natural gas amounts are Retained
thousand cf, barrels, mmBtus), and the
carbon content of the fuel. The formula metered directly at multiple stages, and
billing systems require rigorous Records that must be kept include
is simple and can be automated. The quantity of individual fuels supplied,
mass-balance approach is used reconciliation of data. In cases where
BTU content, carbon content
extensively in national GHG metered data are not available, reporters
determined, flow records and/or invoice
inventories, and in existing reporting may estimate the missing volumes based
records for customers with amount of
guidelines for facilities, companies, and on contracted maximum daily quantities
natural gas received, type of customer
States, such as the WRI/WBCSD GHG and known conditions of receipt and
receiving natural gas (so the
Protocol. delivery during the period when data disaggregated report by category can be
For carbon content, we have prepared are missing. checked), and data for determining
two look-up tables listing default CO2 5. Selection of Data Reporting carbon content for natural gas
emission factors of natural gas and Requirements processing plants. These records are
natural gas liquid. These emission necessary to enable verification that the
factors are drawn from published We propose that LDCs and gas GHG monitoring and calculations were
sources, including the American processing plants report CO2 emissions done correctly. Records related to the
Petroleum Institute Compendium, EIA, directly to EPA on an annual basis. end-user (e.g., ammonia facility) are
and the U.S. GHG Inventory. LDCs would also report CO2 emissions required to allow us to reconcile data
Where natural gas processing plants disaggregated into categories that reported by different facilities and
extract and separate individual represent residential consumers, entities, and to ensure that coverage of
components of NGLs, the facilities commercial consumers, industrial natural gas supply and end-use is
should report carbon content by consumers, and electricity generating comprehensive.
individual component of the NGLs. In facilities. Further information would be A full list of records that must be
cases where raw NGLs are not provided on the facilities to which LDCs retained onsite is included in proposed
separated, the processing plants should deliver greater than 460,000 thousand cf 40 CFR part 98, subparts A and NN.
report carbon content for the raw NGLs. of natural gas during the calendar year,
112 460,000 thousand cf/year is a conservative
111 In
which would be used by EPA to check
2006, CO2, CH4 and N2O emissions from estimate of the amount of dry natural gas that when
natural gas combustion were 1,155.1, 1.0, and 0.6
and verify information on facilities fully combusted would produce at least 25,000
MMTCO2e, respectively. covered under other subparts of this metric tons of CO2.
OO. Suppliers of Industrial GHGs array of applications, including imported in pre-charged equipment.115
electrical transmission and distribution In 2006, an additional 2.5 million metric
equipment (as an electrical insulator tons CO2e of fluorinated GHGs were
The industrial gas supply category and arc quencher) and in magnesium imported in closed-cell foams. Together,
includes facilities that produce N2O or casting operations (as a cover gas to these imports are expected to constitute
fluorinated GHGs,113 importers of N2O prevent oxidation of molten metal). NF3 between five and ten percent of U.S.
or fluorinated GHGs, and exporters of is used in the semiconductor industry, consumption of fluorinated GHGs.
N2O or fluorinated GHGs. These increasingly to reduce overall Once produced or imported,
facilities and entities are collectively semiconductor GHG emissions through fluorinated GHGs can have hundreds of
referred to as ‘‘suppliers of industrial processes such as NF3 remote cleaning millions of downstream emission
GHGs’’. and NF3 substitution during in-situ points. For example, the gases are used
Under the proposed40 CFR part 98, cleaning. Fluorinated ethers (HFEs and in almost all car air conditioners and
subpart OO, if you produce fluorinated HCFEs) are used as anesthetics (e.g., household refrigerators and in other
GHGs or N2O, you would be required to isofluorane, desflurane, and ubiquitous products and applications.
report the quantities of these gases that sevoflurane) and as heat transfer fluids Thus, tracking emissions of these gases
you produce, transform (use as (e.g., the H-Galdens). from all downstream uses would not be
feedstocks in the production of other In 2006, 12 U.S. facilities produced practical.
chemicals), destroy, or send to another Nitrous oxide. N2O is a clear,
over 350 million metric tons CO2e of
facility for transformation or colorless, oxidizing gas with a slightly
HFCs, PFCs, SF6, and NF3. More
destruction. Importers and exporters of sweet odor. N2O is a strong GHG with
specifically, 2006 production of HFCs is
bulk fluorinated GHGs and N2O would a GWP of 310.116
estimated to have exceeded 250 million
be required to report the quantities that N2O is primarily used in carrier gases
metric tons CO2e while production of
they imported or exported and the with oxygen to administer more potent
PFCs, SF6, and NF3 was estimated to be
quantities that they imported and sold inhalation anesthetics for general
almost 100 million metric tons CO2e.
or transferred to another person for anesthesia and as an anesthetic in
We estimate that an additional 6
transformation or destruction. As various dental and veterinary
facilities produced approximately 1
described in Sections III and IV of this applications. In this application, it is
million metric tons CO2e of fluorinated
preamble, emissions from general used to treat short-term pain, for
anesthetics.
stationary fuel combustion sources and sedation in minor elective surgeries and
fugitive emissions from fluorinated gas Fluorinated GHGs are imported both as an induction anesthetic. The second
production are addressed separately in bulk (contained in shipping main use of N2O is as a propellant in
(Sections V.C and V.L of this preamble). containers and cylinders) and in pressure and aerosol products, the
Fluorinated GHGs. Fluorinated GHGs products. For further information, see largest application being pressure-
are man-made gases used in a wide the Bulk Imports and Exports of packaged whipped cream. In smaller
variety of applications. They include Fluorinated Gases TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR– quantities, N2O is also used as an
HFCs, PFCs, SF6, NF3, fluorinated 2008–0508–042) and the Imports of oxidizing agent and etchant in
ethers, and other compounds such as Fluorinated GHGs in Products TSD semiconductor manufacturing, an
perfluoropolyethers. CFCs and HCFCs (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–043). EPA oxidizing agent (with acetylene) in
also contain fluorine and are GHGs, but estimates that over 110 million metric atomic absorption spectrometry, an
both the production and consumption tons CO2e of bulk HFCs, PFCs, and SF6 oxidizing agent in blowtorches used by
(production plus import minus export) were imported into the U.S. in 2007 by jewelers and others, a fuel oxidant in
of these ODS are currently being phased over 100 importers (PIERS, 2007). In auto racing, and a component of the
out and otherwise regulated under the CO2e terms, SF6 and NF3 each made up production of sodium azide, which is
Montreal Protocol and Title VI of the about one third of this total, while HFCs used to inflate airbags.
CAA. We are not proposing accounted for one quarter and PFCs Two companies operate a total of five
requirements for ODS under proposed made up the remainder. Several other N2O production facilities in the U.S..
40 CFR part 98. fluorinated GHGs may be imported in These facilities produced an estimated
Fluorinated GHGs are powerful GHGs smaller quantities, including fluorinated 4.5 million metric tons CO2e of N2O in
whose ability to trap heat in the ethers such as the H-Galdens and 2006.
atmosphere is often thousands to tens of anesthetics such as desflurane (HFE– N2O may be imported in bulk or
thousands times as great as that of CO2, 236ea2), isoflurane (HCFE–235da2), and inside products. We estimate that
on a pound-for-pound basis. Some sevoflurane. approximately 300,000 metric tons CO2e
fluorinated GHGs are also very long A variety of products containing of bulk N2O were imported into the U.S.
lived; SF6 and PFCs have lifetimes fluorinated GHGs are imported into the in 2007 by 18 importers. Products that
ranging from 3,200 to 50,000 years.114 U.S. Imports of particular importance may be imported include several of
HFCs are the most commonly used include pre-charged air-conditioning, those listed above, particularly pre-
fluorinated GHGs, they are used refrigeration, and electrical equipment blended anesthetics and aerosol
primarily as a replacement for ODS in and closed-cell foams. Pre-charged air-
115 The number of refrigeration and AC units
a number of applications, including air- conditioning and refrigeration
imported in 2010 was assumed to equal the number
conditioning and refrigeration, foams, equipment contains a full or partial of units imported in 2006. The refrigeration and AC
fire protection, solvents, and aerosols. (holding) charge of HFC refrigerant, units imported in 2006 were pre-charged with both
PFCs are used in fire fighting and to while pre-charged electrical equipment HFCs and HCFCs. (HCFCs are ozone-depleting
manufacture semiconductors and other contains a full or partial charge of SF6 substances that are regulated under the Montreal
Protocol and are exempt from the proposed
electronics. SF6 is used in a diverse insulating gas. Closed-cell foams definition of fluorinated GHG.) However, by 2010,
contain HFC blowing agent. EPA expects that all imported refrigeration and AC
113 Please see the proposed definition of units will be charged with HFCs, because imports
We estimate that in 2010,
fluorinated GHG near the end of this section. pre-charged with HCFCs will not be permitted
114 IPCCC SAR available at: http://www.ipcc.ch/ approximately 18 million metric tons starting in that year.
ipccreports/assessments-reports.htm. CO2e of fluorinated GHGs would be 116 IPCCC SAR.
products such as pressure-packaged reporting. The monitoring requirements of fluorinated GHG because they are
whipped cream. are discussed in Section V.OO.3 of this already regulated under the Montreal
Further information on N2O supply preamble. The protocols whose scopes Protocol and Title VI of the CAA.
and import can be found in the were most similar to the one proposed EPA requests comment on the
Suppliers of Industrial GHGs TSD for industrial gas supply were EPA’s proposed definition. EPA also requests
(EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–041). Stratospheric Protection Program, the comment on two other options for
Selection of Reporting Facilities and EU Regulation on Certain Fluorinated defining or refining the set of
Types of Data to be Reported. Because Greenhouse Gases, the Australian fluorinated GHGs to be reported. The
fluorinated GHGs and N2O have an Synthetic Greenhouse Gas Reporting first option would permit a fluorocarbon
extremely large number of relatively Program, and EPA’s Chemical to be excluded from reporting if (1) the
small downstream sources, reporting of Substances Inventory Update Rule. All
downstream emissions of these gases GWP for the fluorocarbon were not
four of these programs require reporting listed in Table A–1 of proposed 40 CFR
would be incomplete, impractical, or of production and imports, and the first
both. On the other hand, the number of part 98, subpart A or in any of the IPCC
three also require reporting of exports. Assessment Reports or World
upstream producers, importers, and In addition, the EU regulation and
exporters is comparatively small, and Meteorological Organization (WMO)
EPA’s Stratospheric Ozone Protection Scientific Assessments of Ozone
the quantities that would be reported by Program require reporting of the
individual gas suppliers are often quite Depletion, and (2) the producer or
quantities of chemicals (ODS) importer of the fluorocarbon could
large. Thus, upstream reporting is likely transformed or destroyed. In general, the
to be far more complete and cost- demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the
proposed requirements in this rule are Administrator, that the fluorocarbon
effective than downstream reporting. based closely on those in EPA’s
For these reasons, we are proposing to had an atmospheric lifetime of less than
Stratospheric Ozone Protection one year and a 100-year GWP of less
require upstream reporting of the Program. By accounting for all chemical
quantities required to estimate U.S. than five. In general, we expect that new
flows into and out of the U.S., including fluorocarbons would be used in
consumption of N2O and fluorinated destruction and transformation, this
gases. ‘‘Consumption’’ is defined as the relatively low volumes. For such
approach results in an estimate of chemicals, a GWP of five may be a
sum of the quantities of chemical consumption that is more closely
produced in or imported into the U.S. reasonable trigger for reporting.
related to actual U.S. emissions than are
minus the sum of the quantities of estimates of consumption that do not The second option would be to
chemical transformed (used as a account for all of these flows. require reporting only of those
feedstock in the production of other Proposed Definition of Fluorinated fluorinated chemicals listed in Table
chemicals), destroyed, or exported from A–1 of proposed 40 CFR part 98,
GHGs. We propose to define
the U.S. subpart A. The disadvantage of this
‘‘Fluorinated GHG’’ as SF6, NF3, and any
In developing this proposed rule, we approach is that it would exclude any
reviewed a number of protocols that fluorocarbon except for ODS as they are
defined under EPA’s stratospheric new (or newly important) fluorocarbons
track chemical consumption, its whose GWPs have not been evaluated.
components (production, import, protection regulations at 40 CFR part 82,
subpart A. In addition to SF6 and NF3, As discussed above, fluorocarbons in
export, etc.), or similar quantities. These general are likely to have significant
protocols included EPA’s Stratospheric this definition would include any
hydrofluorocarbon, any GWPs. Given the pace of technological
Ozone Protection regulations at 40 CFR development in this area, production
part 82, the EU Regulation on Certain perfluorocarbon, any fully fluorinated
linear, branched or cyclic alkane, ether, (and emissions) of these gases could
Fluorinated Greenhouse Gases (No. 842/ become significant before the chemicals
2006), the Australian Commonwealth tertiary amine or aminoether, any
perfluoropolyether, and any were added to the table.
Government Ozone Protection and
Synthetic Greenhouse Gas Reporting hydrofluoropolyether. 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
Program, EPA’s Chemical Substances EPA is proposing this definition
because HFCs, PFCs, SF6, NF3, and In developing the proposed
Inventory Update Rule at 40 CFR
many fluorinated ethers are known to thresholds for producers and importers
710.43, EPA’s Acid Rain regulations at
have significant GWPs. (For a list of of fluorinated GHGs and N2O, we
40 CFR part 75, the TRI Program, and
these GWPs, see Table A–1 of proposed considered production, capacity, and
the 2006 IPCC Guidelines.117
We reviewed these protocols both for 40 CFR part 98, subpart A.) In addition, import/export thresholds of 1,000
their overall scope and for their specific although not all fluorocarbons have had metric tons CO2e, 10,000 metric tons
requirements for monitoring and their GWPs evaluated, any fluorocarbon CO2e, 25,000 metric tons CO2e, and
with an atmospheric lifetime greater 100,000 metric tons CO2e per year.
117 We also reviewed other programs, including than one year is likely to have a Table OO–1 of this preamble shows the
the DOE’s 1605(b) Program, EPA’s Climate Leaders significant GWP due to the radiative emissions and facilities that would be
Program, and the European Commission’s Article 6 properties of the carbon-fluorine bond. covered under the various thresholds for
reporting requirements, but we found that these
programs did not monitor consumption or its As discussed above, ODS are production and bulk imports of N2O and
components. excluded from the proposed definition HFCs, PFCs, SF6, and NF3.
TABLE OO–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR INDUSTRIAL GAS SUPPLY

Total national Production or imports covered Facilities Covered
Emission production or
threshold level Number of
Source category import
(metrics tons facilities Metric tons
(metric tons Percent Number Percent
CO2e/yr) CO2e/yr
CO2e/yr)
HFC, PFC, SF6, and

NF3 Producers ........ 1,000 350,000,000 12 350,000,000 100 12 100
10,000 350,000,000 12 350,000,000 100 12 100
25,000 350,000,000 12 350,000,000 100 12 100
100,000 350,000,000 12 350,000,000 100 12 100
N2O Producers ........... 1,000 4,500,000 5 4,500,000 100 5 100
10,000 4,500,000 5 4,500,000 100 5 100
25,000 4,500,000 5 4,500,000 100 5 100
100,000 4,500,000 5 4,500,000 100 5 100
N2O and Fluorinated
GHG Importers
(bulk) ....................... 1,000 110,024,979 116 110,024,987 100 111 96
10,000 110,024,979 116 109,921,970 99.9 81 70
25,000 110,024,979 116 109,580,067 99.6 61 53
100,000 110,024,979 116 108,703,112 98.8 44 38
Producers. We are proposing to exporters to report their imports and production that was later transformed or
require reporting for all N2O and exports if either their total imports or destroyed at the facility, but excluding
fluorinated GHG production facilities. their total exports, in bulk, of all any used GHG product that was added
As shown in Table OO–1 of this relevant gases, exceed 25,000 metric to the production process (e.g., HFCs
preamble, all identified N2O, HFC, PFC, tons CO2e. We are proposing this returned to the production facility and
SF6, and NF3 production facilities threshold to reduce the compliance added to the HFC production process
would be covered at all capacity and burden on small businesses while still for reclamation). Production would be
production-based thresholds considered including the vast majority of imports measured wherever it is traditionally
in this analysis. We do not have facility- and exports. As is true for HFC measured, e.g., at the inlet to the day
specific production capacity production, HFC import and export tank or at the shipping dock. The
information for the six facilities levels are expected to increase quantities transformed or destroyed
producing fluorinated anesthetics; significantly during the next several would be reported separately; see
however, if all these facilities produced years as HFCs replace ODS, which are Sections V.OO.3.c and V.OO.3.d of this
the same quantity in CO2e terms, they being phased out under the Montreal preamble. The quantities of used
too would probably be covered at all Protocol. product added to the production
capacity and production-based Because it may be relatively easy for process would be measured and
thresholds. importers and exporters to create new subtracted from the total mass of
The requirement that all facilities corporations in order to divide up their product measured at the end of the
report would simplify the rule and imports and exports and remain below process. This would avoid counting
permit facilities to quickly determine applicable thresholds, we considered used GHG product as new production.
whether or not they must report. The setting no threshold for importers and b. Imports and Exports
one potential drawback of this exporters. However, we are not
proposing this option because we are If you import or export bulk N2O or
requirement is that small-scale fluorinated GHGs, we propose that you
production facilities (e.g., for research concerned that it would be too
burdensome to current small-scale report the total quantities of N2O or
and development) could be fluorinated GHGs that you import or
inadvertently required to report their importers. We request comment on this
export by chemical. Reports would
production, even though the quantities approach, specifically the burden on
include quantities imported in mixtures
produced would be small in both small-scale importers if they were
and the name/number of the mixture, if
absolute and CO2e terms. We are not required to report.
applicable (e.g., HFC–410A). Reporting
currently aware of any small-scale Further information on the threshold
would occur at the corporate level. You
deliberate production of N2O or analysis for industrial gas suppliers can
would not be required to report imports
fluorinated GHGs, but we request be found in the Suppliers of Industrial
or exports of heels (residual quantities
comment on this issue. These research GHGs TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508– inside returned containers) or
and development facilities could be 041). For specific information on costs, transshipments (GHGs that originate in
specifically exempt from reporting. An including unamortized first year capital a foreign country and that are destined
alternative approach that would address expenditures, please refer to section 4 of for another foreign country), but you
this concern would be to establish a the RIA and the RIA cost appendix. would be required to keep records
capacity-based threshold of 25,000 3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring documenting the nature of these
metric tons CO2e, summed across the Methods transactions.
facility’s production capacities for N2O We propose to require reporting of
and each fluorinated GHG. We request a. Production imports and exports in metric tons of
comment on these alternative If you produce N2O or fluorinated chemical because that is the unit in
approaches. GHGs, we propose that you measure the which other quantities (production,
Importers and Exporters. We are total mass of N2O or fluorinated gases emissions, etc.) are proposed to be
proposing to require importers and produced by chemical, including reported under this rule. However,
because the preferred unit for Customs GHGs, you would be required to because they are not flammable. For
reporting is kg rather than tons, EPA estimate the mass of N2O or fluorinated destruction to occur, temperatures must
requests comment on whether it should GHGs transformed. This estimate would be quite high (over 2,300 °F), fuel must
require reporting of imports and exports be the difference between (1) the be provided, flow rates of fuels and air
in kg of chemical. quantity of the N2O or fluorinated GHG (or oxygen) must be kept above certain
In general, these proposed fed into the process for which the N2O limits, flow rates of fluorinated GHG
requirements are consistent with those or fluorinated GHG was used as a must be kept below others, and for some
of other programs that monitor imports feedstock, and (2) the mass of any particularly difficult-to-destroy
and exports of bulk chemical, unreacted feedstock that was not chemicals such as CF4, pure oxygen
particularly EPA’s Stratospheric Ozone returned to the process. Measuring the must sometimes be fed into the process.
Protection regulations. quantity of N2O or fluorinated GHGs If one or more of these process
Existing programs vary in their actually fed into the process would requirements is not met, DEs can drop
treatment of products containing account for any losses between the point sharply (in some cases, by an order of
chemicals whose bulk import must be where total production of the magnitude or more), and fluorinated
reported. The Australian program fluorinated GHG is measured and the GHGs would simply be exhausted from
requires reporting of all ODS and GHGs point where the fluorinated GHG is the device. Both construction
imported in pre-charged equipment, reacted as a feedstock (transformed). deficiencies and operator error can lead
including the identity of the refrigerant, The mass of any unreacted feedstock to a failure to meet process
the number of pieces of equipment, and that was not returned to the process requirements; thus, both initial testing
the charge size. The Inventory Update would be ascertained using mass flow and periodic monitoring are important
Rule requires reporting of chemicals measurements and (if necessary) gas for verifying destruction device
contained in products if the chemical is chromatography. performance. We request comment on
designed to be released from the the option of requiring that the annual
product when it is used (e.g., ink from d. Destruction
destruction device emissions
a pen). EPA’s Stratospheric Ozone Under the proposed rule, if you measurement be performed using a
Protection regulations do not currently produce and destroy fluorinated GHGs, compound that is at least as difficult to
require reporting of ODS contained in you would be required to estimate the destroy as the most difficult-to-destroy
imported equipment or other imported quantity of each fluorinated GHG GHG ever fed into the device, e.g., SF6
products; however, (1) EPA has destroyed. This estimate would be based or CF4.
prohibited the introduction into on (1) the quantity of the fluorinated
We believe that owners or operators of
interstate commerce, including import, GHG fed into the destruction device,
facilities that destroy fluorinated GHGs
of certain non-essential products and (2) the DE of the device. In
developing the estimate, you would be are already likely to verify the DEs of
typically pre-charged with these
required to account for any decreases in their destruction devices. Many
chemicals, and (2) EPA is in the process
the DE of the device that occurred when facilities destroying fluorinated GHGs
of proposing new regulations to prohibit
import of equipment pre-charged with the device was not operating properly are likely to destroy ODS as well. In this
HCFCs. (as defined in State or local permitting case, they are already subject to
We are not proposing to require that requirements and/or destruction device requirements to verify the DEs of their
importers of products containing N2O or manufacturer specifications). Finally, devices.
fluorinated GHGs report their imports. you would be required to perform We request comment on the extent of
In general, we are concerned that it annual fluorinated GHG concentration potential overlap between the
would be difficult for importers to measurements by gas chromatography to destruction reported under proposed 40
identify and quantify the GHGs confirm that emissions from the CFR part 98, subpart OO and that
contained in these products and that the destruction device were as low as reported under proposed 40 CFR part
number of importers would be high. expected based on the DE of the device. 98, subpart L. To obtain an accurate
However, it may be easier for importers If emissions were found to be higher, estimate of the net supply of fluorinated
to identify and quantify the GHGs then you would have the option of using industrial greenhouse gases, fluorinated
contained in a few types of products, the DE implied by the most recent GHGs that are produced and
such as pre-charged equipment and measurements or of conducting more subsequently destroyed should be
foams. For example, the identities and extensive measurements of the DE of the subtracted from the total produced or
amounts of fluorinated GHGs contained device. imported. However, if fluorinated GHGs
in equipment are generally well known; These proposed requirements are are never included in the mass
this data is typically listed on the identical to those proposed for produced (e.g., because they are
nameplate affixed to every unit. destruction of HFC–23 that is generated removed from the production process
Moreover, in aggregate, the quantities of as a byproduct during HCFC–22 with or as byproducts), then including
GHGs imported in equipment can be production. They are also similar to them in the mass destroyed would lead
large, for example, over 7 million metric those contained in EPA’s Stratospheric to an underestimate of supply. One
tons CO2e in imported pre-charged Ozone Protection Regulations. Those possible solution to this problem would
window air-conditioners. We request regulations include detailed be to require facilities producing and
comment on whether we should require requirements for reporting and verifying destroying fluorinated GHGs to
reporting of imports or exports of pre- transformation and destruction of separately estimate and report their
charged equipment and/or closed-cell chemicals. destruction of fluorinated GHGs that
foams, including the likely burden and We are proposing requirements for have been counted as produced in either
benefits of such reporting. verifying the DE of destruction devices the current year or previously.
used to destroy fluorinated GHGs EPA is not proposing to require
c. N2O or Fluorinated GHGs because fluorinated GHGs, particularly reporting of N2O destruction, because
Transformed PFCs and SF6, are difficult to destroy. In EPA is not aware that such destruction
Under the proposed rule, if you many cases, these chemicals have been occurs. However, EPA requests
chemically transform N2O or fluorinated selected for their end uses precisely comment on this.
e. Precision, Accuracy, and Calibration Agency believes that these precision conversion. This approach could be
Requirements and accuracy requirements (0.2 percent) used in the very unlikely event that
The protocols and guidance reviewed should not represent a significant neither primary nor secondary direct
by EPA differ in their level of specificity burden to chemical producers, who measures of production were available.
regarding the measurement of already use and regularly calibrate
b. Imports and Exports
production or other flows, particularly measurement devices with similar
accuracies. We do not believe that missing data
regarding their precision and accuracy
EPA is not proposing precision and would be a problem for importers and
requirements. Some programs, such as
accuracy requirements for importers and exporters of GHGs due to their
the Stratospheric Ozone Protection
exporters of bulk chemical; however, requirement to declare the quantities of
regulations, do not specify any accuracy
EPA requests comment on whether such GHGs imported or exported for Customs
requirements, while other programs
requirements (e.g., 0.5 to 1 percent) purposes. However, we request
specifically define acceptable errors and
would be appropriate. comment on this assumption.
reference industry standards for
calibrating and verifying monitoring 4. Selection of Procedures for Estimating 5. Selection of Data Reporting
equipment. One of the latter is 40 CFR Missing Data Requirements
part 75, Appendix D, which establishes Under the proposed rule, facilities
a. Production
requirements for measuring oil and gas would be required to submit data,
flows as a means of estimating SO2 In the event that any data on the mass described below, in addition to the
emissions from their combustion. These produced, fed into the production production, import, export, feedstock,
requirements include a requirement that process (for used material being and destruction data listed above. This
the fuel flowmeter accuracy be within 2 reclaimed), fed into transformation data is intended to permit us to check
percent of the upper range value and a processes, fed into destruction devices, the main estimates submitted. A
requirement that flowmeters be or sent to another facility for complete list of data to be reported is
recalibrated at least once a year. transformation or destruction, is included in proposed 40 CFR part 98,
In today’s proposed rule, we are unavailable, we propose that facilities subparts A and OO.
proposing to require facilities to be required to use secondary
measure the mass of N2O or fluorinated measurements of these quantities. For a. Production
GHGs produced, transformed, or example, facilities that ordinarily Facilities producing N2O or
destroyed using flowmeters, weigh measure production by metering the fluorinated GHGs would be required to
scales, or a combination of volumetric flow into the day tank could use the submit data on the total mass of
and density measurements with an weight of product charged into shipping reactants fed into the production
accuracy and precision of 0.2 percent of containers for sale and distribution. We process, the total mass of non-GHG
full scale or better. In addition, we are understand that the types of flowmeters reactants and byproducts permanently
proposing to require that weigh scales, and scales used to measure fluorocarbon removed from the process, and the mass
flowmeters, and/or other measurement production (e.g., Coriolis meters) are of used product added back into the
devices be calibrated every year or generally quite reliable, and therefore it production process. Facilities would
sooner if an error is suspected based on should rarely be necessary to rely on also be required to provide the names
mass-balance calculations or other secondary production measurements. In and addresses of other facilities to
information. Facilities could perform general, production facilities rely on which they sent N2O or fluorinated
the verification and calibration of their accurate monitoring and reporting of GHGs for transformation or destruction.
scales and flowmeters during routine production and related quantities. All quantities would be annual totals in
product line maintenance. Finally, we If concentration measurements were metric tons, by chemical.
are proposing that facilities unavailable for some period, we propose
transforming or destroying fluorinated that the facility be required to report the b. Imports/Exports and Destroyers of
GHGs calibrate gas chromatographs by average of the concentration Fluorinated GHG
analyzing, on a monthly basis, certified measurements from just before and just Importers of N2O or fluorinated GHGs
standards with known GHG after the period of missing data. would be required to submit an annual
concentrations that are in the same There is one proposed exception to report that summarized their imports,
range (percent levels) as the process these requirements: If the facility has providing the following information for
samples. reason to believe that either method each import: The quantity of GHGs
EPA requests comment on these would result in a significant under- or imported by chemical, the date on
proposed requirements. EPA overestimate of the missing parameter, which the GHGs were imported, the
specifically requests comment on the then the facility would be required to port of entry through which the GHGs
proposed frequency of calibration for develop an alternative estimate of the passed, the country from which the
flowmeters; the Agency understands parameter and explain why and how it imported GHGs were imported, and the
that some types of flowmeters that are developed that estimate. We would have importer number for the shipment.
commonly employed in chemical the option of rejecting this alternative Importers would also be required to
production, such as the Coriolis type, estimate and replacing it with the value provide the names and addresses of any
may require less frequent calibration. developed using the usual missing data persons and facilities to which the
We are proposing specific accuracy, method if we did not agree with the imported GHGs were sold or transferred
precision, and calibration requirements rationale or method for the alternative for transformation or destruction.
because the high GWPs and large estimate. Exporters of N2O and fluorinated
volumes of fluorinated GHGs produced We request comment on these GHGs would be required to submit an
make such requirements worthwhile for methods for estimating missing data. We annual report that summarized their
this source category. For example, a one also request comment on the option of exports, similar to the report provided
percent error at a typical facility estimating missing production data by importers. A complete list of data to
producing fluorinated GHGs would based on consumption of reactants, be reported is included in the proposed
equate to 300,000 metric tons CO2e. The assuming complete stoichiometric rule.
These proposed requirements are very the bill of lading for the export and the discussed under suppliers of industrial
similar to those that apply to importers invoice for the import. GHGs (see Section V.OO of this
and exporters of ODS under EPA’s preamble) because most of these
c. Transformation
Stratospheric Ozone Protection facilities import or export multiple
Program. We are proposing them Owners or operators of production industrial gases. For a full discussion of
because they would provide us with facilities using N2O or fluorinated GHGs this source category, refer to the
valuable information for verifying the as feedstocks would be required to keep Suppliers of CO2 TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR–
nature and size of GHG imports and records documenting: The initial and 2008–0508–044).
exports. annual calibration of the flowmeters or According to the U.S. GHG Inventory
In addition to annually reporting the scales used to measure the mass of GHG in 2006, the total supply of CO2 from
mass of fluorinated GHG fed into the fed into the destruction device and the industrial facilities and CO2 production
destruction device, facilities destroying periodic calibration of gas wells was approximately 40.6 million
fluorinated GHGs would be required to chromatographs used to analyze the metric tons CO2e. Further research in
submit a one-time report including the concentration of N2O fluorinated GHG support of this rulemaking identified
following: The destruction unit’s DE, in the product for which the GHG is three additional facilities capturing a
the methods used to record volume used as a feedstock. CO2 stream for sale. Data for two of
destroyed and to measure and record these facilities suggest an additional 0.5
d. Destruction million metric tons CO2e captured.
DE, and the names of other relevant
Federal or State regulations that may Owners or operators of GHG Currently, the majority of CO2 (79
apply to destruction process. This one- production facilities that destroy percent) is produced from CO2
time report is very similar to that fluorinated GHGs would be required to production wells. Approximately 18
required under EPA’s Stratospheric keep records documenting: The percent of CO2 is produced at natural
Ozone Protection regulations. information that they send in the one- gas processing facilities and less than 2
time and annual reports, the initial and percent from ammonia production
6. Selection of Records That Must Be annual calibration of the flowmeters or facilities. Less than 1 percent of CO2 is
Retained scales used to measure the mass of GHG captured at other industrial facilities.
EPA is proposing that the following fed into the destruction device, the Fugitive Emissions from CO2 Supply.
records be retained because they are method for tracking startups, Fugitive CO2 emissions can occur from
necessary to verify production, import, shutdowns, and malfunctions and any the production of CO2 streams from CO2
export, transformation, and destruction GHG emissions during these events, and production wells or capture at industrial
estimates and related quantities and the periodic calibration of gas facilities or process units, as well as
calibrations. chromatographs used to annually during transport of the CO2, and during
analyze the concentration of fluorinated or after use of the gas. We propose to
a. Production exclude the explicit reporting of fugitive
GHG in the destruction device exhaust
Owners or operators of facilities stream, as well as the representativeness CO2 emissions from CO2 supply at
producing N2O or fluorinated GHGs of the conditions under which the industrial facilities or process units and
would be required to keep records of the measurement took place. CO2 production wells, as well as from
data used to estimate production, as CO2 pipelines, injection wells and
well as records documenting the initial PP. Suppliers of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) storage sites. Much of the CO2 that
and periodic calibration of the 1. Definition of the Source Category could ultimately be released as a
flowmeters or scales used to measure fugitive emission during transportation,
production. CO2 is used for a variety of injection and storage, would be
commercial applications, including food accounted for in the CO2 supply
b. Imports and Exports processing, chemical production, calculated using the methods below.
Importers of N2O or fluorinated GHGs carbonated beverage production, Although separate calculation and
would be required to keep the following refrigeration, and petroleum production reporting of fugitive CO2 emissions are
records substantiating each of the for EOR, which involves injecting a CO2 not proposed for inclusion, we believe
imports that they report: A copy of the stream into injection wells at well fields that obtaining robust data on fugitive
bill of lading for the import, the invoice for the purposes of increasing crude oil CO2 emissions from the entire carbon
for the import, the U.S. Customs entry production. Possible suppliers of CO2 capture and storage chain would
form, and dated records documenting include industrial facilities or process provide a more complete understanding
the sale or transfer of the imported GHG units that capture a CO2 stream, such as of the efficacy of carbon capture and
for transformation or destruction (if those found at electric power plants, storage technologies as an option for
applicable). natural gas processing plants, cement mitigating CO2 emissions.
Every person who imported a kilns, iron and steel mills, ammonia We seek comment on the decision to
container with a heel would be required manufacturing plants, petroleum exclude the reporting of fugitive CO2
to keep records of the amount brought refineries, petrochemical plants, emissions from the carbon capture and
into the U.S. and document that the hydrogen production plants, and other storage chain. We have concluded that
residual amount in each shipment is combustion and industrial process there could be merit in requiring the
less than 10 percent of the net mass of sources. These suppliers can capture reporting of fugitive emissions from
the container when full and would: and/or compress CO2 for delivery to a geologic sequestration of CO2, in
Remain in the container and be variety of end users as discussed above. particular. This is discussed further
included in a future shipment, be To ensure consistent treatment of CO2 below.
recovered and transformed, or be suppliers and given the large percentage Geologic Sequestration of CO2. CO2
recovered and destroyed. of CO2 supplied from CO2 production used in most industrial applications
Exporters of N2O, or fluorinated wells, we have also proposed inclusion would eventually be released to the
GHGs, would be required to keep the of facilities producing CO2 from CO2 atmosphere. For EOR applications,
following records substantiating each of production wells in the proposal. however, some amount of CO2 could
the exports that they report: A copy of Importers and exporters of CO2 are ultimately remain sequestered in deep
geologic formations. The objective of and reporting fugitive emissions from • An assessment of the risks of CO2
EOR operations is not to maximize carbon capture, transport, injection and leakage, or escape of CO2 from the
reservoir CO2 retention rates, but to storage. A summary of these protocols subsurface to the atmosphere, including
maximize oil production and the can be found in the Review of Existing an evaluation of potential leakage
amount of CO2 trapped underground Programs memorandum (EPA–HQ– pathways such as deep wells, faults, and
would be a function of site specific and OAR–2008–0508–054). Based on this fractures.
operational factors. There are several review, a possible approach to include • An overview of the methods used to
EOR operations in the Permian Basin of geologic sequestration might be to ask model the subsurface behavior of CO2
Texas. One study showed that retention EOR operators to submit a geologic and the results.
rates for eight reservoirs ranged from 38 sequestration report. This report could • Baseline conditions used to
to 100 percent with an average of 71 provide information on the amount of evaluate performance of the site
percent, but many of these projects are CO2 sequestered (based on the amount including the amount of naturally
not mature enough to predict final of CO2 injected minus any fugitive occurring CO2 emissions and/or other
retention (see Suppliers of CO2 TSD emissions) along with a written characteristics that would be used to
(EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–044)). description of the activities undertaken demonstrate the effectiveness of the
We are not proposing the inclusion of to document and verify the amount system to contain CO2.
geologic sequestration in the proposed sequestered at each site. This report • Summary of the monitoring plan
rulemaking. However, the Agency could include the following supporting that would be used to determine CO2
recognizes that there may be significant information: emissions from the site including a
stakeholder interest in reporting the • The owner and operator of the
discussion of the methodology,
amount of CO2 injected and geologically geologic sequestration site(s). Including
rationale, and frequency of monitoring.
sequestered at EOR operations in order the business name, address, contact
name, and telephone number. The information listed above could be
to demonstrate the effectiveness of EOR submitted one time and then updated as
• Location of the geologic
projects that ultimately intend to store appropriate. However, the volume of
sequestration site(s) including a map
the CO2 for long periods of time. If an showing the modeled aerial extent of CO2 injected and any emissions from
EOR project intends to sequester CO2 for the CO2 plume over the lifetime of the the storage site, including physical
long periods of time, there would be project. leakage from the geologic formation (via
additional operational factors and post- • Permitting information. Including natural features or wells) and/or fugitive
operational considerations and information on the UIC well permit(s) emissions of CO2 co-produced with oil/
monitoring. Although EPA is not issued by the appropriate State or gas, would be reported on an annual
proposing inclusion of this source in the Federal agency: Permit number or other basis in order to quantify the amount of
rulemaking, we have outlined initial unique identification, date the permit CO2 geologically sequestered.
thoughts about how geologic was issued and modified if applicable,
sequestration might be included in a 2. Selection of Reporting Threshold
permitting agency, contact name, and
reporting program for EOR sequestration telephone number. EPA has identified at least nine
or other types of geologic sequestration. • An overview of the site industrial facilities or process units in
We welcome comment on the approach characteristics, referencing or providing the U.S. that currently capture CO2
outlined below or other suggestions for information which demonstrates (three natural gas processing plants, two
how to quantify and verify the amount sufficient storage capacity for the ammonia facilities, two electricity
of CO2 sequestered in geologic expected operating lifetime of the plant generation facilities, one soda ash
formations. and the presence of an effective production plant, and one coal
We reviewed a number of existing and confining system overlying the injection gasification facility) (Table PP–1 of this
proposed methodologies for monitoring zone. preamble).
TABLE PP–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR CO2 SUPPLY FROM INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES OR PROCESS UNITS
Total number
Threshold level metric tons emissions of U.S.
CO2e (metric tons facilities Metric tons Percent Number Percent
CO2e) CO2e/yr
1,000 ........................................................................ 8,184,875 9 8,186,881 100 9 100

10,000 ...................................................................... 8,184,875 9 8,186,881 100 9 100
25,000 ...................................................................... 8,184,875 9 8,186,881 100 9 100
100,000 .................................................................... 8,184,875 9 8,036,472 98 5 56
Under the proposed rule, all exceed the threshold. The analysis did triggering other subparts of the proposed
industrial facilities that capture and not account for stationary combustion at rule.
transfer a CO2 stream would be required each facility. We concluded that all Based on the volumes of CO2 supplied
to report the mass of CO2 captured and/ facilities capturing CO2 would likely by facilities producing a CO2 stream
or transferred. All known existing already exceed the reporting thresholds from CO2 production wells, we also
facilities exceed all but the highest under other subparts of proposed 40 propose that they be subject to
reporting threshold of 100,000 metric CFR part 98 for their downstream reporting. Currently there are four
tons CO2e, taking into account solely the emissions. Therefore, a proposed natural formations—Jackson Dome,
mass of CO2 captured. At the 25,000 threshold of ‘‘All In’’ for reporting CO2 Bravo Dome, Sheep Mountain, and
metric tons CO2e threshold considered supply from industrial facilities or McElmo Dome. Data are not available to
by other subparts of this rule, all process units would not bring in estimate emissions from individual
industrial facilities and capture sites additional facilities not already owners or operators operating within
the Domes, therefore emissions data are owner or operator in a given Dome defining the reporting facility (e.g.,
presented at the Dome level (Table PP– report the mass of CO2 extracted and/or reporting at the level of an individual
2 of this preamble). We propose that all transferred off site. We are seeking well).
CO2 production wells owned by a single comment on alternative methods for
TABLE PP–2. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR CO2 SUPPLY CO2 PRODUCTION WELLS
Total number
emissions
Threshold level metric tons CO2e of U.S.
(metric tons Metric tons
facilities * Percent Number Percent
CO2e) CO2e/yr
1,000 .................................................................... 31,358,853 4 31,358,853 100 4 100

10,000 .................................................................. 31,358,853 4 31,358,853 100 4 100
25,000 .................................................................. 31,358,853 4 31,358,853 100 4 100
100,000 ................................................................ 31,358,853 4 31,358,853 100 4 100
* Under this proposal, owners or operator would be required to report on all CO2 production wells under their ownership/operation in a single
Dome.
We have concluded that reporting the gas on at least a quarterly basis to concluded that while direct
volume of the CO2 streams from CO2 determine CO2 composition of the CO2 measurement of fugitive emissions may
production wells is important given the stream. If the necessary flow meters are not be common practice, and is
large fraction of CO2 supplied from CO2 not currently installed, CO2 suppliers therefore not proposed, measurement of
production wells. Further, we conclude would use mass flow meters to measure CO2 transfer is.
that there is minimal burden associated the volume of the CO2 stream
with these requirements, as all transferred offsite.
We propose to require reporting on Missing Data
necessary monitoring equipment should
already be installed to support current the volume of the CO2 stream at the Facilities with missing monitoring
operating practice. point of capture, extraction, import and data on the volume of the CO2 stream
Importers and exporters of CO2 in export because this would provide captured, extracted, imported, and
bulk should review the threshold information on the total quantity of CO2 exported should use the greater of the
language for industrial GHG suppliers available for sale. Measuring at this volume of the CO2 stream transferred
found in Section OO of this preamble, initial point could provide additional offsite or the quarterly or average value
which proposes a threshold of 25,000 information in the future on fugitive for the parameter from the past calendar
metric tons CO2e, for applicability. We CO2 emissions from onsite purification, year. The owners or operators of
decided to have a single threshold processing, and compression of the gas. facilities monitoring emissions at the
applicable for bulk importers and However, if the necessary flow meters point of transfer offsite, that have
exporters of all industrial gases, because are not currently in place, facilities may missing monitoring data on the CO2
many are importing and/or exporting conduct measurements at the point of stream transferred, may use the
multiple industrial gases. We decided CO2 transfer offsite. quarterly or average value for the
not to include CO2 imported or exported We conclude that there is minimal parameter from the past calendar year.
in products (e.g., fire extinguishers), incremental burden associated with this
because of the potentially large number approach for CO2 suppliers at industrial Facilities with missing data on the
of sources. facilities or process units, CO2 composition of the CO2 stream captured,
For additional information on the production wells, importers and extracted, imported, and exported
threshold analysis please refer to the exporters because these sites likely should use the quarterly or average
Suppliers of CO2 TSD (EPA–HQ–OAR– already have the necessary flow meters value for the parameter from the past
2008–0508–044). For specific installed to monitor the CO2 stream. In calendar year.
information on costs, including addition, facilities need to know CO2 5. Selection of Data Reporting
unamortized first year capital composition of the gas in order to Requirements
expenditures, please refer to section 4 of ensure the gas meets appropriate
the RIA and the RIA cost appendix. specifications (e.g., food grade CO2). For CO2 supply, the proposed
We also considered requiring CO2 monitoring method is based on direct
3. Selection of Proposed Monitoring suppliers to report only on CO2 sales, measurement of the gaseous and liquid
Methods without determining the actual CO2 CO2 streams. All CO2 suppliers would
The monitoring plan for CO2 composition of the gas sold. This is a report, on an annual basis, the measured
suppliers at industrial facilities or relatively simple method, however, volume of the CO2 stream that is
process units, CO2 production wells, facilities already routinely measure the captured, extracted, imported and
and CO2 importers and exporters composition of the gas, providing exported if the proper flow meter is
involves accounting for the total volume greater certainty in the potential installed to carry out these
of the CO2 stream captured, extracted, emissions data. measurements. Facilities monitoring
imported and exported. We propose that The methods proposed are generally emissions at the point of transfer offsite
if CO2 suppliers already have the flow consistent with existing GHG reporting would report the annual volume of the
meter installed to directly measure the protocols. Although existing protocols CO2 stream transferred. All suppliers
CO2 stream at the point of capture, focus on accounting for fugitive also would report, on an annual basis,
extraction, import and/or export, that emissions, and not quantity of CO2 the CO2 composition of the gas sold.
facilities use the existing flow meter to supplied, direct measurement is The end-use application of the supplied
measure CO2 supply. We propose that commonly the recommended approach CO2 (e.g., EOR, food processing) should
facilities sample the composition of the for measuring fugitive emissions. We also be reported, if known.
EPA proposes to collect data on the operation of passenger and freight approach is somewhat different from the
measured volume of the CO2 stream vehicles within U.S. boundaries, natural direct reporting of tons per year of
captured, extracted, imported and gas used to power domestic pipelines, emissions that is appropriate for the
exported, as well as gas composition lubricants associated with mobile non-mobile source categories addressed
because these form the basis of the GHG sources, and international bunker fuels elsewhere in this preamble. However,
calculations and are needed for EPA to purchased in the U.S. for travel outside EPA would be able to use the GHG
understand the emissions data and U.S. boundaries. GHG emissions from emission rate data from manufacturers
verify reasonableness of the reported these sources in 2006 totaled 2102.6 Tg with our existing models and other
emissions. EPA also proposes to collect CO2e, representing 29.3 percent of total information to project tons of GHG
information on the end use of the U.S. GHG emissions. Just under 79 emissions for the various mobile source
transferred CO2, if known, because CO2 percent of these emissions came from categories.
can be used in emissive or non-emissive on-road sources, including passenger Although the new reporting
applications. Collecting data on the cars and light-duty trucks (58.8 percent), requirements proposed here focus on
ultimate fate of the CO2 stream can medium- and heavy-duty trucks (19.2 emission rates from new vehicles and
provide information on the potential percent), buses (0.6 percent) and engines, EPA also is very interested in
emissions of CO2 released to the motorcycles (0.1 percent). Aircraft continually updating and improving our
atmosphere. (including domestic military flights) understanding of the in-use activity and
accounted for 11.6 percent of total emissions from mobile sources.
6. Selection of Records That Must Be transportation GHGs, ships and boats 5 Thus, we are seeking comment on the
Retained percent, rail 2.8 percent, pipelines 1.5 need to collect in-use travel activity and
Owners or operators of all CO2 percent, and lubricants 0.5 percent. other emissions-related data from States
suppliers would be required to retain These estimates primarily reflect GHGs and local governments and mobile
onsite all quarterly measurements for resulting from the combustion of fuel to source fleet operators. Section V.QQ.4 of
the volume of the CO2 stream captured, power U.S. transportation sources. this preamble describes the existing
extracted, imported and exported, and These estimates do not include State and local government and fleet
CO2 composition. Where measurements emissions from the operation of other operator data that EPA currently collects
are based on CO2 transferred offsite, non-transportation mobile equipment and requests public comment on the
these quarterly measurements would be and recreational vehicles, which need for, and substance of, additional
retained, along with CO2 composition. collectively accounted for over 2 reporting requirements.
percent of total U.S. GHG emissions.
QQ. Mobile Sources GHGs produced by transportation 3. Mobile Source Vehicle and Engine
1. Definition of the Source Category sources include CO2, N2O and CH4, Manufacturers
which result primarily from the a. Overview
This section of the preamble describes combustion of fuel to power these
proposed GHG reporting requirements sources or from treatment of the exhaust As mentioned above, EPA is
for manufacturers of new mobile gases, and HFCs, which are released proposing GHG reporting requirements
sources, including motor vehicles and through the operation, servicing and that fit within the reporting framework
engines, nonroad vehicles and engines, retirement of vehicle A/C systems. CO2 established for EPA’s long-established
and aircraft engines.118 It also seeks is the predominant GHG from these criteria pollutant emissions control
comment on the need to collect sources, representing 95 percent of programs and vehicle fuel economy
additional in-use travel activity and transportation GHG emissions (weighted testing program. While the details of the
other emissions-related data from States by the GWP of each gas). HFCs account programs vary widely among the vehicle
and local governments and mobile for 3.3 percent, N2O for 1.6 percent, and and engine categories, EPA generally
source fleet operators. These proposed CH4 for 0.1 percent of transportation requires manufacturers to conduct
requirements and the requests for GHG emissions. EPA is proposing emissions testing and report the
comments are based on EPA’s authority reporting requirements for each of these resulting emissions data to EPA for
under CAA Sections 114 and 208. gases, where appropriate. approval on an annual basis prior to the
Not discussed in this portion of the introduction of the vehicles or engines
preamble are proposed GHG reporting 2. Selection of Proposed GHG into commerce. As a part of this process,
requirements related to transportation Measurement, Reporting, and since the early 1970s, EPA has collected
fuels (see Section V.MM of this Recordkeeping Requirements criteria pollutant emissions data for all
preamble, Suppliers of Petroleum For the new vehicle and engine categories of vehicles and engines used
Products) and motor vehicle and engine manufacturer reporting requirements in the transportation sector, including
manufacturing facilities (see Section V.C proposed in this Notice, EPA intends to engines used in nonroad equipment (see
of this preamble, General Stationary build on our long-established programs Table QQ–1 of this preamble).
Fuel Combustion Sources). that control vehicle and engine
Total Emissions. For the U.S. emissions of criteria pollutants TABLE QQ–1. MOBILE SOURCE
transportation sector, the 2008 U.S. including hydrocarbons, NOX, CO, and VEHICLE AND ENGINE CATEGORIES
Inventory includes GHGs from the PM. These programs, which include
emissions standards, testing procedures, Category
118 The terms ‘‘manufacturers’’ and and emissions certification and
‘‘manufacturing companies’’, as used in this compliance requirements, are based on Light-duty vehicles
section, mean companies that are subject to EPA Highway heavy-duty vehicles (chassis-cer-
emissions certification requirements. This primarily
emission rates over prescribed test
tified)
includes companies that manufacture vehicles and cycles (e.g., grams of pollutant per mile
Highway heavy-duty engines
engines domestically and foreign manufacturers or grams per kilowatt-hour). Thus, we Highway motorcycles
that import vehicles and engines into the U.S. propose having manufacturers also
market. In some cases, this also includes domestic Nonroad diesel engines
companies that are required to meet EPA
report GHG emissions in terms of Marine diesel engines
certification requirements when they import emission rates for this reporting Locomotive engines
foreign-manufactured vehicles or engines. program. It is important to note that this Nonroad small spark ignition engines
TABLE QQ–1. MOBILE SOURCE VEHI- We believe that this exemption would manufacturers to measure and report
CLE AND ENGINE CATEGORIES— avoid the relatively high per-vehicle or CO2 for essentially all of their vehicle
Continued per-engine reporting costs for small testing. Requiring manufacturers to also
manufacturers without detracting from measure and report the other GHGs
Category the goals of the reporting program, as emitted by these vehicles, as proposed
discussed below. in this Notice and discussed below,
Nonroad large spark ignition engines It is important to note that this would introduce a modest but
Marine spark ignition engines/personal ‘‘threshold’’ would differ from the reasonable additional testing and
watercraft approach proposed for other source reporting burden.
Snowmobiles categories discussed in Section V of this For CH4 and N2O, we propose that
Off-highway motorcycles and all terrain vehi- preamble. That is, EPA would not have manufacturers begin to measure these
cles manufacturers determine their emissions as a part of existing emissions
Aircraft engines
eligibility based on total tons emitted certification and fuel economy test
per year. As discussed above, EPA’s procedures (FTP, SFTP, HFET, et al.), if
For purposes of EPA certification,
current mobile source criteria pollutant they are not already doing so, and then
manufacturers typically group vehicles/
control programs are based on emissions to report those emissions in the same
engines with similar characteristics into
rates over prescribed test cycles rather cycle-weighted format that they report
families and perform emission tests on
than tons per year estimates. Since we other emission results under the current
representative or worst-case vehicles/
are proposing to build on our existing certification requirements. Because such
engines from each family. Integral to
system, we believe that a threshold testing has not generally been required,
EPA’s existing certification procedures
based on manufacturer size is some manufacturers would need to
are well-established methods for
appropriate for the mobile source sector. install additional exhaust analysis
assuring the completeness and quality equipment for the measurement of CH4
Although the emission rates of some
of reported emission test data. We are and/or N2O. In most cases, both of these
vehicles and engines would not be
proposing to require manufacturers to types of new analyzers could be added
reported, we do not believe this is a
measure and report GHG emissions data as modular units to existing test
concern because the technologies—and
as part of these current emissions testing equipment.
thus emission rates—from larger
and certification procedures. These In the case of N2O, since this
manufacturers represent the same basic
procedures, appropriate here because of pollutant has not previously been
technologies and emission rates of
the long-standing history and structure included in the certification testing
essentially all vehicles and engines. It is
of mobile source control programs, are process, it is necessary to introduce a
also worth noting that the
necessarily different from the new analytical procedure for the
manufacturers that meet the small
monitoring-based methods proposed for measurement of N2O over the FTP. This
manufacturer definitions represent a
other sources elsewhere in this notice. is not the case for CH4, however, since
very small fraction of overall vehicle
After a discussion of the proposed an analytical procedure for CH4 testing
and engine sales. For nine out of the
small business threshold, the following already exists. We propose that
twelve non-aircraft mobile source
subsections describe the proposed GHG manufacturers use an N2O procedure
categories (there are currently no small
emissions measurement and reporting found in the regulatory language
aircraft engine manufacturers), we
requirements for manufacturers. As associated with this notice that would
estimate that sales from small
discussed in those subsections, some be based largely on the procedures
manufacturers represent less than 10
manufacturers already measure and currently used to measure CO2 and CO,
percent of overall sales (for eight of
report some GHG emissions, some using nondispersive infrared
these categories, including light-duty
measure but do not have to report GHG measurement technology. In addition,
vehicles, small manufacturers account
emissions, and others would need to EPA is proposing a ‘‘scrubbing’’ stage as
for less than 3 percent of sales). For the
measure and report for the first time. We a part of this procedure that would
remaining three categories (highway
propose that the new measurement and remove sulfur compounds that can
motorcycles, all terrain vehicles/off-road
reporting requirements apply beginning contribute to N2O formation in the
motorcycles, and small spark ignition
with the 2011 model year, although we sample bag. (See proposed 40 CFR
engines) we estimate that small entities
encourage voluntary measurement and 1065.257 and 1065.357 for the proposed
account for less than 32 percent of sales.
reporting for model year 2010. Please see the discussion of our N2O measurement procedures.) EPA
b. Selection of a Reporting Threshold compliance with the RFA in Section requests comments on all aspects of the
IX.C of this preamble. We request proposed N2O measurement procedure,
In most of EPA’s recent mobile source including potential alternate methods
comments on our proposed approach for
regulatory programs for criteria with equal or better analytical
the reporting threshold for mobile
pollutants, EPA has applied special performance.
source categories.
provisions to small manufacturers. EPA Measuring and Reporting A/C-Related
proposes to exempt small manufacturers c. Light-Duty Vehicles CO2. Manufacturers of light-duty
from the GHG reporting requirements. We propose that manufacturers of vehicles, unlike manufacturers of heavy-
We define ‘‘small business’’ or ‘‘small passenger cars, light trucks, and duty and nonroad engines, sell their
volume manufacturer’’ separately for medium-duty passenger vehicles products as complete engine-plus-
each mobile source category. These measure and report emissions of CO2 vehicle combinations that include the
definitions were established in the (including A/C-related CO2), CH4, N2O, vehicles’ A/C systems. Thus, we believe
regulations during the rulemaking and refrigerant leakage.119 Existing it is appropriate that these
process for each category, which criteria pollutant emissions certification manufacturers report A/C-related
included consultation with small regulations, as well as fuel economy emissions as a part of their existing
entities and with the Small Business testing regulations, already require vehicle certification requirements. EPA
Administration. We’re proposing to use does not currently require these
these same definitions in each case for 119 See 40 CFR 1803–01 for full definitions of manufacturers to measure or report the
the reporting requirements exemption. ‘‘light-duty vehicle’’. A/C-related CO2 emissions (or the
leakage of refrigerants, as discussed Testing, each of which would represent believe that A/C-related CO2 can be
below) under current regulations. We the performance of a larger group of accurately demonstrated on the Idle
propose that these manufacturers begin vehicles with common A/C-related Test at 75 °F, avoiding the significant
to measure A/C-related CO2 emissions technical characteristics. We believe facility and testing issues associated
(i.e., the indirect CO2 emissions that in most cases the vehicles that with higher temperature testing. In
resulting from the additional load manufacturers currently test for fuel order to better simulate ‘‘real world’’
placed on the engine by an operating A/ economy purposes (as described in 40 idling conditions, we propose that the
C system), using a proposed new test CFR 600.208(a)(2)) would generally also A/C CO2 Idle Test be performed with
cycle, which is described below. This capture the key engine-A/C system- the engine compartment hood and
testing would not require new vehicle configurations that may exist windows closed and without operating
equipment, and the proposed test cycle within a given model type. The the test site cooling fan that is usually
is similar to one that exists in many complete set of our proposed criteria for used to simulate the motion of the
State Inspection & Maintenance (I/M) manufacturers to meet in selecting the vehicle on the road.
programs. representative vehicles for the A/C CO2 The proposed A/C CO2 Idle Test
The current FTP for light-duty Idle Test is found in the regulatory procedure specifies how climate control
vehicles is performed with the A/C language in the proposed rule (see systems, whether manual or automatic,
turned on only during the SC03, or ‘‘air proposed 40 CFR 86.1843–01, ‘‘Air would need to be set to appropriately
conditioning,’’ test procedure. This test conditioning system commonality’’). simulate the maximum and minimum
is used to verify emissions compliance The A/C CO2 Idle Test would cooling demands on the A/C system.
in a ‘‘worst-case’’ situation when the A/ compare the additional CO2 generated at CO2 exhaust emission measurements, in
C system is operating under relatively idle with the A/C system in operation to grams per minute, would be taken
extreme conditions. The SC03 is also the CO2 generated at idle with the A/C during both of these modes.
used in the 5-cycle fuel economy system off. Manufacturers would run Manufacturers would conduct the idle
calculation for fuel economy labeling. the test with the vehicle’s A/C system test following the completion of a FTP
Thus, although the SC03 test results in operating under complete control of the certification test, a fuel economy test, or
a value for CO2 emissions (in grams per climate control system and for a a test over the US06 cycle. As discussed
mile), the incremental increase of CO2 sufficient length of time to stabilize the above, manufacturers would measure
resulting from operation of the A/C cabin conditions and tailpipe emission the change in CO2 due to A/C operation
system, especially in a more typical levels. EPA believes that this test would in grams per minute and then would
situation, is not quantified. account for the CO2 contributions from divide this value by the interior volume
In order to provide for consistent, most of the key A/C system components in cubic feet, for an A/C CO2 emission
accurate measurement of A/C-related and modes of operation. value in terms of grams per minute per
CO2 emissions, EPA proposes to The additional CO2 generated when cubic foot. The manufacturer would
introduce a specifically-designed test the A/C is operated during the Idle Test report this value to EPA with other
procedure for A/C-related CO2 would then be normalized to account emission results.
emissions. Manufacturers would run for the interior cabin volume of the EPA also requests comment on three
this proposed test, the A/C CO2 Idle vehicle. This normalization is necessary different approaches that could be used
Test, with the engine idling, upon because the size and capacity of an A/ alone or in combination with the
completion of an emissions certification C system is related to the volume of air proposed A/C CO2 Idle Test or with
test—such as the FTP, highway fuel that an A/C system must cool. Rather each other. Each of these tests would
economy, or US06 test. The proposed A/ than simply reporting the vehicle’s CO2 capture a somewhat different set of
C CO2 Idle Test is similar to the ‘‘Idle emissions, this normalization would aspects of A/C-related CO2 emissions.
CO’’ test, which was once a part of provide a more appropriate metric of First, EPA is seeking comment on basing
vehicle certification, and is still used in CO2 emissions to compare systems that reporting requirements on the SC03 test
State I/M programs (see 40 CFR part 51, must cool relatively larger volumes with (or some variant of this test), which, as
subpart S, Appendix B). those that cool smaller volumes. EPA described above, is designed to simulate
Within each vehicle model type, proposes that the interior cabin volume more extreme driving conditions than
various configurations of engine and be defined as the volume of air that the the standard certification tests. Using
cooling system options can be expected air conditioner cools, which includes the SC03 test to determine A/C-related
to have somewhat different A/C-related the volume of space used by passengers CO2 performance would likely require
CO2 performance.120 However, we and, in some vehicles, the volume used manufacturers to run tests in additional
believe that vehicles sharing certain for cargo. The proposed calculation of modes or to repeat the test in order to
technical characteristics would interior cabin volume is adapted from capture more real-world A/C usage (i.e.,
generally have similar A/C-related CO2 an industry protocol, Society of a stabilized cabin temperature).
emissions. Specifically, vehicles with Automotive Engineers (SAE) Surface Therefore such an approach could
the same engine, A/C system design, Vehicle Standard J1100. involve significant modifications to the
and interior volume would be expected The proposed A/C CO2 Idle Test SC03 test procedure. The rationale for
in most cases to have similar A/C- would require three approximately 10- considering such an adapted SC03 test
related CO2 performance. In order to minute periods of CO2 emissions would be to characterize more systemic
minimize the number of new tests that measurement once the vehicle’s cabin technological features (such as thermal
manufacturers would be required to conditions and climate control system management and transient A/C control)
perform, EPA is proposing that have stabilized in order to quantify the that may not be captured in a 75 °F idle
manufacturers be allowed to select a A/C related CO2. The test would be run test or a bench test (as discussed below).
subset of vehicles for A/C CO2 Idle at 75 °F, the standard temperature of the Second, EPA is seeking comment on
FTP. As discussed below, EPA basing reporting requirements on a
120 In the existing regulations covering vehicle
considered proposing a more complex ‘‘bench’’ test procedure similar to the
emissions certification, under ‘Definitions’ in 40 procedure that would be performed at a one being developed by the SAE and the
CFR 600.002–85(a)(15), ‘‘model type’’ means a
unique combination of car line, basic engine, and higher temperature, such as the 95 °F University of Illinois, which was
transmission class. used in the SC03 test. However, we employed to measure A/C efficiency
improvements for the industry/ establish a vehicle’s expected refrigerant and report emissions prior to the
government Improved Mobile Air leakage emissions. engines being sold to separate
Conditioning project. This bench test Under our proposal, each key A/C- companies that build trucks or buses
only measures the power consumption related component and system would be and install engines in them.
of the A/C compressor with simulated assigned an expected rate of refrigerant Manufacturers of gasoline-fueled
loads, and is not integrated into a leakage, in the form of a leakage complete vehicles below 14,000 pounds
vehicle (as would be the case in the ‘‘score,’’ in terms of grams per year. Gross Vehicle Weight Rating, such as
proposed A/C CO2 Idle Test, which is a These individual scores would be added large pick-ups and SUVs, are required to
‘‘chassis,’’ or whole-vehicle, test). The to result in an overall leakage score for measure and report vehicle emissions,
purpose of the bench test for the vehicle. We propose that as do manufacturers of light-duty
characterizing A/C-related CO2 manufacturers establish an overall vehicles. These vehicles are described
emissions would be to have a relatively leakage score for the same test vehicle(s) as ‘‘complete’’ vehicles because the
repeatable test that could represent a on which they run the A/C CO2 Idle vehicles leave the primary
variety of temperature and humidity Test, as described above. manufacturing facility fully assembled,
conditions around the country. Unlike a The cooperative industry and with the engine and associated
chassis test, there would not be a direct government Improved Mobile Air hardware installed and the load-
connection to a vehicle’s interior Conditioning Program referenced above carrying container attached.
volume, and we would need to develop also has developed a comprehensive set Manufacturers That Certify Engines.
assumptions about a vehicle’s interior of leakage scores that EPA proposes to EPA proposes to require manufacturers
volume in order to normalize the use to represent the significant sources to report CO2 emissions from highway
results. This test procedure might be of A/C refrigerant leakage from newer heavy-duty diesel and gasoline engines.
less expensive than a modified SC03 vehicles. The Improved Mobile Air All manufacturers currently measure
test. Conditioning Program and the SAE have CO2 as an integral part of calculating
Finally, EPA is seeking comment on established a template for calculating emissions of criteria pollutants, and
basing reporting requirements on individual leakage scores based on the some report CO2 emissions in some
design-based criteria for characterizing quantity and type of components, form. We propose that engine
A/C-related CO2 emissions. Design- fittings, seals, and hoses utilized in a manufacturers report CO2 to EPA with
based criteria would be conceptually specific A/C system design; this criteria pollutant emission results and,
similar to the ones proposed for leakage template is known as the SAE Surface as with the criteria emissions, report the
emissions characterization as described Vehicle Standard J2727. EPA is CO2 emissions in terms of brake-specific
below. A manufacturer would choose proposing a set of component and emissions (i.e., in units of grams of CO2
technologies from a list provided by system leakage scores, based closely on per brake-horsepower-hour).
EPA in the rule where we would specify J2727, but expanded to place greater We also propose that highway heavy-
the A/C-related CO2 characteristics emphasis on characterizing leakage duty engine manufacturers measure and
associated with each major component emissions later in the vehicle’s life. Like report CH4 emissions. This would
and technology, including system the J2727, this proposed EPA protocol require most manufacturers to install
control strategy and systems integration. would associate each technology or CH4 exhaust analytical equipment or to
While such a design-based approach system design approach with a specific arrange for testing at another facility.
might capture the expected CO2 leakage score. Each score would be a This equipment is usually designed to
emissions of individual components design-based, ‘‘leakage-equivalent’’ be installed as a modular addition to
and controls, it would not necessarily value that would take into account existing analytical equipment.
capture overall system A/C-related CO2 expected early-in-life refrigerant leakage Procedures for analyzing CH4 are
(when the A/C components would be from the specified components and currently in place.
integrated into the vehicle and would systems. Manufacturers would report Finally, we also propose that these
interact with the engine, cabin this value to EPA on their application manufacturers measure and report N2O.
conditions, and other vehicle for certification. As with CH4, this would require most
characteristics, such as the under-hood In addition, we request comment on manufacturers to install new, usually
environment). the whether other A/C design modular, N2O exhaust analytical
Calculating and Reporting a ‘‘Score’’ considerations, such as use of equipment, or to arrange for testing at
for A/C-Related Refrigerant Leakage. As alternative refrigerants, monitoring another facility. Because it has not been
part of most of EPA’s existing mobile refrigerant leakage (with fault storage necessary in the past to measure N2O,
source emissions testing and and indicators), and minimizing we are proposing a new procedure for
certification programs, where robust test refrigerant quantity, should be used in measuring N2O (see proposed 40 CFR
procedures have been developed and determining an A/C leakage score. 1065.257 and 1065.357).
are in widespread use, EPA has relied As with CO2, manufacturers would
on ‘‘performance-based’’ approaches, d. Highway Heavy-Duty Diesel and measure both CH4 and N2O as a part of
where emissions are measured directly Gasoline Vehicles and Engines the existing FTP for heavy-duty engines
during vehicle or engine operation to EPA’s highway heavy-duty vehicle and report the results to EPA with other
determine emission levels. Examples of and engine emissions testing and criteria pollutant emission test results.
performance-based test procedures certification programs generally cover Manufacturers That Certify Complete
include the FTP and the proposed A/C vehicles above 8,500 pounds Gross Highway Heavy-Duty Vehicles. We
CO2 Idle Test discussed above. In the Vehicle Weight Rating.121 For most large propose that manufacturers certifying
case of A/C refrigerant leakage, where it trucks, manufacturers are required to complete heavy-duty vehicles be subject
is known that leakage of refrigerants measure and report criteria air pollutant to the same measurement and reporting
with high GWPs occurs, a reliable, emissions data for engines rather than requirements as manufacturers of heavy-
performance-based test procedure to vehicles. Engine manufacturers measure duty engines. Thus, as described above,
measure such emissions from a vehicle these manufacturers would report the
does not yet exist. Instead, we are 121 See 40 CFR 1803–01 for full definitions of CO2 emissions they are currently
proposing a ‘‘design-based’’ approach to ‘‘heavy-duty vehicle’’ and ‘‘heavy-duty engine.’’ measuring as part of criteria air
pollutant emissions testing and would However, these engines are very similar ‘‘direct measurement’’ approach is used
additionally measure and report CH4 (in terms of design, technology, and to determine fuel consumption, there is
and N2O. Although vehicle emissions certification process) to their no need to measure CO2 levels in the
testing (also known as ‘‘chassis testing’’) counterparts certified for highway intake air or exhaust. For manufacturers
is different than engine-only testing, operation. Given these similarities, we that generally use only the direct
measurement procedures are the same, propose that manufacturers of these measurement approach, new analysis
and we are proposing measurement and engines measure and report CO2, CH4, equipment might be required to measure
reporting requirements for complete and N2O in the same manner as CO2 levels in the intake air and exhaust.
heavy-duty vehicles that are essentially manufacturers of highway heavy-duty We propose that manufacturers measure
identical to our proposed requirements diesel and gasoline engines, as and report cycle-weighted CO2
for heavy-duty engines. described earlier in this section of the emissions (in the same ‘‘grams-per-unit-
However, manufacturers of complete preamble. of-work’’ format used for criteria
heavy-duty vehicles, unlike heavy-duty Like highway heavy-duty truck and pollutant emissions reporting) for all
engine manufacturers, are generally bus manufacturers that use certified engines in these categories, regardless of
responsible for installing the vehicle’s engines, nonroad diesel equipment the method used to determine fuel
A/C equipment. For this reason, we manufacturers install certified engines consumption. We also propose that
propose that these manufacturers be into their equipment but do not certify highway motorcycle manufacturers
responsible for reporting A/C-related their equipment. As with trucks and measure and report CO2 in terms of
emissions, in exactly the same ways that buses, this equipment is often equipped grams per mile.
we are proposing for light-duty with A/C systems. While we are not For CH4, many of the engines
manufacturers, as described in Section proposing any reporting requirements described above are subject to ‘‘total’’
V.QQ.3.c of this preamble. Thus, we for nonroad equipment manufacturers, hydrocarbon, or ‘‘hydrocarbon + NOX ’’
propose that these manufacturers we request comment on the standards (as opposed to ‘‘non-CH4’’
perform the A/C CO2 Idle Test and appropriateness, feasibility, and cost of hydrocarbon standards applying to
report the A/C-related CO2 emissions. extending some form of the proposed A/ some other categories), and thus CH4
We also request comment on the C CO2 Idle Test and refrigerant leakage emissions may not typically be
potential applicability of the alternate score reporting requirements discussed measured. In these cases, the
A/C CO2 measurement procedures above to nonroad equipment manufacturers would need to install
discussed above to manufacturers of manufacturers. We also request CH4 emissions analysis equipment. We
complete heavy-duty vehicles. In comment on extending A/C-related GHG
propose that manufacturers report cycle-
addition, we propose that these reporting requirements to transportation
weighted CH4 emissions for these
manufacturers calculate and report an refrigeration units that are equipped
engines and for highway motorcycles.
overall A/C refrigerant leakage ‘‘score,’’ with separate engines that are certified
using the same assigned component and under EPA’s nonroad engine program. Finally, we are proposing that
system scores we have developed for the manufacturers also report the cycle-
f. Nonroad Small Spark-Ignition weighted N2O emissions for these
proposed light-duty scoring system.
Vehicle Manufacturers That Install Engines, Marine Spark-Ignition Engines, engines and for highway motorcycles.
Certified Engines. We are not proposing Personal Watercraft, Highway As with CH4, manufacturers would
any requirements for the heavy-duty Motorcycles, and Recreational Engines likely need to install N2O emissions
truck and bus manufacturers that install and Vehicles analysis equipment. The proposed new
certified engines into their vehicles. There is a large range of spark-ignition procedure for measuring N2O is found
These truck manufacturers currently are engines in this category including in the draft regulations (40 CFR
not required to certify their trucks to engines used in portable power 1065.257 and 1065.357).
EPA emissions standards and do not equipment, snowmobiles, all terrain g. Locomotive and Marine Diesel
conduct emissions testing. However, we vehicles, off-highway motorcycles, Engines
recognize that these vehicles are automotive-based, inboard engines used
generally equipped with A/C systems by in marine vessels. For purposes of this We are proposing that manufacturers
the truck or bus manufacturer. We proposed reporting rule, we also include of locomotive and marine diesel
request comment on the highway motorcycles, which are tested engines—including those who certify
appropriateness, feasibility, and cost of as complete vehicles. We are proposing ‘‘remanufactured’’ engines—measure
extending some form of the proposed that manufacturers measure and report and report CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions
A/C CO2 Idle Test and refrigerant CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions for these for locomotive and marine diesel
leakage score requirements discussed engines and vehicles. As part of existing engines. Manufacturers of these engines
above for manufacturers of complete criteria pollutant emissions testing already measure CO2 emissions during
heavy-duty trucks to these truck and bus requirements, manufacturers must the course of existing criteria air
manufacturers as well. In addition, we determine the amount of fuel consumed pollutant emission testing requirements,
request comment on how original- either through direct measurement or but generally do not report this to EPA.
equipment or aftermarket auxiliary through chemical balances of the fuel, For manufacturers of these engines, we
power units—if used to provide power intake air, and exhaust. With the propose that CO2 emissions be reported
for cabin A/C—might be incorporated ‘‘chemical balance’’ approach, CO2 in the same cycle-weighted, work-based
into a GHG reporting program. levels in the intake air and exhaust are format (i.e., g/bhp-hr) as used for criteria
measured (along with either the intake pollutant emissions reporting. For C3
e. Nonroad Diesel Engines and Nonroad air flow rate or exhaust flow rate), and marine diesel engines, we are requesting
Large Spark-Ignition Engines fuel consumption is calculated based on comment on whether indirect CO2
Nonroad diesel engines and nonroad fuel properties and the change in CO2 measurement (i.e., calculating the CO2
large spark-ignition (generally gasoline- level between the intake and exhaust levels based on fuel flow rate and fuel
fueled) engines are used in a wide flows. (CO2 levels with associated flow composition parameters) is an
variety of construction, agricultural, and rates can be used to calculate a CO2 appropriate method for those
industrial equipment applications. emission rates). Alternatively, when a manufacturers that do not utilize CO2
analysis equipment in the course of testing, and CH4 is included in the total regulated under 40 CFR 87 requirements
emission testing. hydrocarbon measurement. We propose for criteria air pollutant emissions.124
Since diesel locomotives are subject that manufacturers of these engines
to ‘‘total’’ hydrocarbon standards (which 4. Request for Comments on Travel
begin to separately measure and report
include CH4 in the measured and Activity and Other In-Use, Emissions-
CH4 for all engines in this category for
reported hydrocarbon value), as Related Data
which they are currently required to
opposed to ‘‘non-CH4’’ hydrocarbon measure and record criteria air pollutant Travel activity and other emissions-
standards (which do not include CH4), emissions as part of the certification related data from State and local
manufacturers typically do not measure process. Some manufacturers may need governments and fleet operators are
CH4 emissions. With the exception of C3 to acquire CH4 emissions analysis critical to understanding the overall
marine diesel engines (which do not equipment. We ask for comment on the GHG contribution of the mobile source
have any ‘‘hydrocarbon’’ emission degree to which engine manufacturers sector. These data serve the important
standards, and are not required to now have the needed equipment in their role of reflecting real-world conditions
measure hydrocarbon or CH4 certification test cells to measure CH4. and capturing activity levels (e.g.,
emissions), we propose that distance traveled and hours operated)
Since little or no N2O is formed in
manufacturers measure and report CH4 from all vehicles and engines, which
modern gas turbine engines, we are not
emissions as a part of certification. To can complement data that
proposing to require N2O measurement
do so, we expect that some manufacturers report on expected
or reporting.
manufacturers would need to install emissions rates from new vehicles and
equipment for analyzing CH4 emissions. Within the mobile source sector, NOX
is a climate change gas unique to engines. EPA already receives some in-
We also propose that manufacturers—
aviation. As required in 40 CFR part 87, use data through existing reporting
except for C3 marine—measure and
manufacturers of turbofan and turbojet programs. The purpose of this section of
report N2O emissions as well. For C3
engines of rated output greater than 26.7 the preamble is to describe these
marine diesel engines, we are requesting
kilonewtons measure and record NOX existing data sources and to request
comment on the appropriateness and
emissions in each of the four LTO test public comment on the need for
feasibility of requiring N2O
modes, and these manufacturers must additional data. In Section V.QQ.4.a of
measurement and reporting on the small
number of engines represented by this comply with the LTO NOX emission this preamble, we describe data
category. As with CH4, we expect that standard (for the entire LTO cycle). EPA currently reported by State and local
most or all manufacturers would need to asks for comment on whether NOX governments, and request comment on
install N2O emissions analysis emissions in the four LTO test modes the potential benefits of the collection of
equipment. The proposed new and for the overall LTO cycles should be additional data. In Section V.QQ.4.b of
procedure for measuring N2O is found reported under the provisions of this this preamble, we highlight the types of
in the proposed regulations (40 CFR proposal, as they are now not reported data reported by fleet operators as part
1065.257 and 1065.357). to EPA for public consideration as is the of the SmartWay Transport Program or
case with all other mobile sources.122 other Federal programs, and request
h. Aircraft Engines comment on the value of other potential
EPA does not currently require reporting requirements.
This category comprises turbofan,
manufacturers of piston engines (used
turbojet, turboprop (turbine-driven a. Travel Activity and Other Data From
in any application) to measure, record
propeller), turboshaft (turbine-driven State and Local Governments
or report criteria air pollutant or GHG
helicopters), and piston propulsion
emissions, and no official FTP exists for
engines for commercial, air taxi, and Travel activity is a term EPA
these engines.123 For these reasons, we
general aviation aircraft. In the case of primarily uses for on-road vehicle
are not proposing any GHG reporting
turbofan and turbojet engines of rated activity and includes the number and
requirements for these engines.
output (or thrust) greater than 26.7 type of vehicles and the distance they
However, we request comment on the
kilonewtons, manufacturers of these travel. State and local governments
potential costs and benefits of reporting
engines are already measuring and collect many types of travel activity
requirements for GHG emissions from
recording CO2 emissions as part of data, including VMT by vehicle type
these engines, including how an
existing criteria air pollutant emission and model year, fuel type, and/or
appropriate emission test cycle might be
requirements for the landing and takeoff functional road class (e.g., limited
designed. We also ask for comment on
cycle. In this notice, we propose that access highways, arterials with traffic
whether the requirements should be
manufacturers measure, record and signals, etc.). Other types of emissions-
applied to turbofan and turbojet engines
report CO2 separately for each mode of related data include vehicle operation
of rated output less than or equal to 26.7
the landing and takeoff (LTO) cycle and environmental conditions that can
kilonewtons, turboprop engines, and
used in the emission certification test, affect emissions during travel, such as
turbo shaft engines which are not now
as well as for the entire landing and idling practices and ambient
takeoff cycle. (The modes of the landing 122 Currently, these engine manufacturers
temperature. Travel activity and other
and takeoff cycle are taxi/idle, takeoff, voluntarily report criteria air pollutant emissions
emissions-related data can vary over
climb out, and approach.) for the LTO cycle to the International Civil Aviation time, between regions, and between
CH4 may be emitted by gas turbine Organization. metropolitan and rural areas within a
engines during idle and by relatively 123 EPA received an administrative petition
given State. EPA can use these data to
older technology engines, but recent asking the agency to determine under section 231 evaluate how changes in vehicle
of the CAA whether lead emissions from general
data suggest that little or no CH4 may be aviation (piston engine) aircraft cause or contribute
emitted by some newer engines. to air pollution which may reasonably be 124 Existing regulations in 40 CFR part 87 include
Manufacturers of turbofan and turbojet anticipated to endanger public health or welfare, smoke number standards for turbofan and turbojet
engines of rated output greater than 26.7 and, if so, to establish standards for such emissions. engines of rated output less than or equal to 26.7
Today’s proposal regarding GHG emissions from kilonewtons and turboprop engines of rated output
kilonewtons are currently measuring piston-engine aircraft is not intended to respond in greater than or equal to 1,000 kilowatts.
hydrocarbon emissions as part of any way to the petition regarding general aviation Requirements for the term turboshaft engine are
existing criteria air pollutant emissions lead emissions. currently not specified in 40 CFR part 87.
technology or travel activity can affect Census Bureau conducted the Vehicle organizations with an urbanized
emissions. Inventory and Use Survey, which population of 200,000 or more)?
EPA currently collects on-road mobile provided valuable data on the physical (5) What nonroad activity data is of
source data to better understand criteria and operational characteristics of the most interest for understanding GHG
air pollutant emissions, and some of nation’s private and commercial truck emissions, and should EPA consider
these data can also be used to populations.128 In specific geographic any additional requirements for
understand GHG emissions. For areas, agencies such as metropolitan reporting such data beyond what is
example, States provide VMT data to planning organizations, State currently required?
the Agency through the AERR.125 EPA departments of transportation, transit b. Mobile Source Fleet Operator Data
currently relies on AERR data to agencies, air quality agencies, and Mobile source fleet operators 129 are in
develop the NEI 126 which is used for, county planning agencies also collect a unique position to collect data that
among other things, evaluating Federal and project State and local travel reflect real-world conditions that are
vehicle and fuel standards for criteria activity and emissions data to meet difficult to integrate into vehicle and
pollutants and mobile source air toxics. Federal requirements, such as DOT’s engine testing procedures or to capture
The AERR requires State air agencies transportation planning requirements in travel activity surveys. Fleet operator
to report mobile source data, including and EPA’s SIP and transportation data includes fuel consumption, which
VMT data at the county level by conformity requirements. can be robustly converted into CO2
roadway type, 127 every three calendar In light of the existing data available emissions, distance traveled, and the
years beginning with the 2002 calendar to EPA, the Agency is not proposing any number and/or weight of passengers and
year (i.e., states report mobile source new reporting requirements for State freight transported. EPA currently
inventories for 2005, 2008, 2011, etc.). and local governments at this time. collects fleet operator data from sources
The most recent submissions are for the However, EPA is interested in that include DOT surveys such as the
2005 calendar year. Although not requesting comment on several topics. Vehicle Inventory and Use Survey
required by the rule, EPA understands (1) Should EPA require States, local (described in Section V.QQ.4.a of this
that some State air agencies consult governments, or other entities to report preamble, but discontinued in 2002), in-
with State and local transportation additional travel activity or emissions- use testing as part of vehicle and engine
agencies in preparing VMT data related data beyond what is required manufacturer compliance programs, ad-
submissions. States also submit other under EPA’s existing reporting hoc internal and external field studies
information that can be used to estimate requirements? How would such data be and surveys, and voluntary programs
criteria pollutant emissions, e.g., age used to inform future climate policy? such as the SmartWay Transport
and speed distributions of vehicles by (2) What, if any, are the specific gaps Partnership. The rest of this section of
vehicle class and roadway type, fuel in the currently reported travel activity the preamble describes the data EPA
properties by county, month, and year, or emissions-related data that are collects as part of our voluntary
and temperature and humidity data by important for understanding on-road programs as well as the DOT’s (DOT)
county, month, and year. The AERR also mobile source GHG emissions? For rail and aviation fleet reporting
requires certain emissions-related example, would it be helpful for EPA to requirements, and requests comment on
information, such as activity data (e.g., better understand State- or county-level the need for, and substance of, any
hours/day of operation), for nonroad VMT growth rates (e.g., based on VMT additional reporting requirements.
mobile sources, according to similar data collected over the past five or ten EPA believes that one of the most
submission requirements as described years or other methodology) or important functions of collecting fleet
above. emissions data related to the freight operator data is to inform operators
In addition to EPA’s existing data sector (e.g., hours of long-duration truck about their emissions profiles and to
collection requirements, there are other idling or truck data that was previously shed light on opportunities to reduce
sources of travel activity and emissions- provided by the Vehicle Inventory and emissions through the use of clean
related data. DOT currently collects Use Survey)? What is the quality of technologies, fuels, and operational
statewide VMT data for urban and rural currently reported State and local VMT strategies. Through the SmartWay
roadway types through its Highway data, and should travel activity and Transport Partnership program, EPA
Performance Monitoring System. DOT emissions-related data quality be requires participating truck and rail
and DOE also publish statistical reports improved? equipment operators, or ‘‘partners,’’ to
such as the Census Transportation (3) Is it sufficient to collect travel report data as part of their voluntary
Planning Package, National Personal activity or emissions-related data every commitment to measure and improve
Transportation Survey, and the Urban three years as currently required, or the environmental performance of their
Mobility Study. In the past, the U.S. should EPA collect such data on an fleets. EPA uses this data to evaluate
annual basis, similar to other collections partner performance. Partners report
125 EPA promulgated the AERR in December 2008 discussed in today’s action? annually on their fuel consumption by
(73 FR 76539) (40 CFR part 51, subpart A). EPA (4) Should EPA consider any fuel type, miles traveled, and tonnage of
promulgated the AERR to consolidate, reduce, and threshold(s) for States, local freight carried. Truck operators also
simplify the current requirements; add limited new governments, or other entities that must
requirements; provide additional flexibility to states have the option of reporting the
in the ways they collect and report emissions data; report additional travel activity or other configuration and model year of each of
and accelerate the reporting of emissions data to emissions-related data? For example, their trucks. There is no minimum
EPA by state and local agencies. The AERR replaces should additional data be reported only emissions reporting threshold for either
the Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR) from larger metropolitan areas with
which was promulgated in June 2002 (67 FR 39602) truck or rail operators. EPA requires
in part to streamline existing periodic emissions more sophisticated transportation partners to report their annual data
inventory requirements for criteria pollutants. systems (e.g., metropolitan planning
126 EPA prepares a national database of air 129 For the purpose of our request for comments,
emissions information from numerous state and 128 The primary goal of the Vehicle Inventory and ‘‘fleet operators’’ are defined as entities that have
local air agencies, from tribes, and from industry: Use Survey database was to produce national and operational control over mobile sources.
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiinformation.html. state-level estimates of the total number of trucks. ‘‘Operational control’’ is defined as having the full
127 Under the AERR, VMT data should reflect This survey was conducted every 5 years, until it authority to introduce and implement operational,
both roadway type and vehicle type information. was discontinued in 2002. environmental, health, and safety policies.
through the SmartWay Freight Logistics report annual fuel consumption and (6) What type of data verification or
Environmental and Energy Tracking ton-miles, among other data, to the quality control should EPA require in
performance model.130 The SmartWay Surface Transportation Board per the any potential reporting requirements?
Freight Logistics Environmental and reporting guidelines in 49 U.S.C. 11145. (7) For potential reporting
Energy Tracking model translates the Large certificated air carriers,135 small requirements, are there preferred
partners’ fuel consumption data into certificated air carriers, and commuter emissions quantification methods other
CO2 emissions based on EPA’s default air carriers with more than $20,000,000 than those presented in the SmartWay
emissions factors for fuels. EPA does not in annual operating revenues must Freight Logistics Environmental and
publicly release individual partners’ report monthly fuel usage data to the Energy Tracking model or the Climate
emissions data. At present, the Bureau of Transportation Statistics via Leaders reporting protocol?
SmartWay Transport Partnership has Form 41 pursuant to 14 CFR part 217
VI. Collection, Management, and
received annual data from more than and part 241. Large certificated air
Dissemination of GHG Emissions Data
400 trucking companies and all seven carriers must also report monthly traffic
Class I rail companies. These partners’ data including distance traveled, A. Purpose
CO2 emissions represent approximately tonnage of freight transported, and This section of the preamble describes
20 percent and 80 percent, respectively, number of passengers transported. the process by which EPA proposes to
of the 2005 national inventory of In light of the existing data available collect, manage, and disseminate data
trucking and rail GHG emissions.131 to EPA, the Agency is not proposing under the GHG reporting rule.
EPA’s Climate Leaders program also mandatory reporting requirements for Section V.B of this preamble describes
requires participating companies that mobile source fleet operators, but is the proposed establishment of a new
operate mobile sources to report CO2, requesting comments on the need for, reporting system that would accept
N2O, CH4, and HFC emissions from and substance of, potential reporting electronic submissions of GHG
those sources annually as a part of their requirements at this time. We request emissions and supporting data, quality
voluntary commitment to develop a comment on the following questions: assure the submissions, store the results,
comprehensive, corporate-wide GHG and provide access to the public. The
(1) Should fleet operators be required
inventory. There are no minimum new system would follow Agency
to report to EPA outside of voluntary
emissions reporting thresholds for standards for design, security, data
participation in the SmartWay or
mobile sources. Companies quantify element and reporting format
Climate Leaders programs? How would
mobile source emissions based on the conformance, and accessibility.
this data be used to inform future
Climate Leaders reporting protocol,132 Existing sources that would be
climate policy?
which outlines several methods for affected by the proposed GHG reporting
calculating CO2 including applying (2) Are there certain categories of
mobile sources that should be included rule may currently report emissions or
EPA’s default factors to fuel other data to the Agency (or in some
consumption data. The reporting or excluded in potential reporting
requirements (e.g., lawn mowers, cases States) under other titles of the
protocol also includes default N2O and CAA including Title I (Emission
CH4 factors for non-road fuel commercial light-duty vehicles, heavy-
duty trucks, rail equipment, aircraft, Inventory, SIP, NSPS and NESHAP),
consumption and on-road miles traveled Title II (National Emissions Standards
by vehicle model year or technology waterborne vehicles)?
Act), Title IV (Acid Rain), Title V (Air
type. Additionally, the reporting (3) Should one or more minimum Operating Permits) and Title VI
protocol includes default HFC leakage emissions thresholds apply based on the (Stratospheric Ozone Protection). EPA
factors for mobile A/C units. As with mobile source category, and what would intends to develop a reporting scheme
SmartWay, EPA does not publicly be appropriate annual thresholds? that minimizes the burden of
release individual participating (4) Are there certain categories of stakeholders by integrating the new
companies’ emissions data. Currently, fleets that should be included or reporting requirements with existing
the Climate Leaders program has excluded from potential reporting data collection and data management
received mobile source data from 37 requirements (e.g., public fleets versus systems, when feasible. Also, EPA
companies representing roughly 0.09 private fleets)? would work with States to ease the
percent of the 2005 national inventory (5) If reporting requirements were to burden on reporters to State and Federal
of transportation sector GHG be introduced, what types of data systems by harmonizing data
emissions.133 should operators report (e.g., fuel management, where possible.
In addition, DOT collects and Section VI.B of this preamble further
consumption for estimating CO2 and
publicly releases extensive data from describes the proposal regarding the
non-road N2O and CH4 emissions;
rail and aircraft operators. All seven frequency and timeliness of reporting,
mileage and vehicle technology for
Class I 134 rail operators are required to the requirement for a Designated
estimating on-road N2O and CH4
130 The SmartWay Freight Logistics emissions; efficiency metrics such as Representative certification, and the
Environmental and Energy Tracking model and emissions per tons carried)? units of measure for submissions and
accompanying user guide and glossary is available published results.
at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/smartway/ more after applying the railroad revenue deflator Section VI.C of this preamble
smartway_fleets_software.htm. formula, which is based on the Railroad Freight describes QA that EPA would perform
131 Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Price Index developed by the U.S. Department of to ensure the completeness, accuracy,
and Sinks: 1990–2005, EPA, 2007. Labor, BLS. The formula is the current year’s
132 See Direct Emissions from Mobile Combustion and validity of submissions. It also
revenues x 1991 average index/current year’s
Sources and Direct HFC and PFC Emissions from average index. describes the feedback that EPA would
Use of Refrigeration and Air Conditioning 135 The definition of ‘‘large certified air provide to emission reporters indicating
Equipment, available at http://www.epa.gov/ carrier’’,‘‘small certified air carrier’’, and the results of the electronic data quality
climateleaders/resources/cross-sector.html. ‘‘commuter air carrier’’ for Form 41 reporting
133 Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
checks.
requirements is available at: http://www.bts.gov/
and Sinks: 1990–2005, EPA, 2007. programs/statistical_policy_and_research/
Section VI.D of this preamble
134 A ‘‘Class I railroad’’ is defined as a carrier that source_and_accuracy_compendium/ discusses publication of data that would
has an annual operating revenue of $250 million or form41_schedule.html. be collected under the proposed
mandatory GHG reporting rule. EPA method would report annually to the unit of time and CO2e emissions per
proposes to make data collected under Agency covering each calendar year by unit of time. Reporting the quantity and
this rule available to State agencies and March 31 of the following year (e.g., type of gas emitted allows for future
the public, with the exception of any annual emissions for calendar year 2010 recalculation of CO2e emissions in the
CBI data, as discussed in Section I.C of would be reported by March 31, 2011.) event that GWP factors change.
this preamble. EPA requests comments 6. Delegation of Authority to State
2. Data Submission
on proposed strategies regarding data Agencies To Collect GHG Data
collection, management, and The Designated Representative
dissemination outlined in this section of (described in proposed 40 CFR part 98, The Agency proposes that affected
the preamble. subpart A and Section IV.G of this sources submit the emissions data and
preamble) must use an electronic supplemental data directly to EPA. The
B. Data Collection signature device (for example, a PIN or Agency believes this would reduce the
1. Data Collection Methods password) to submit a report. If the burden on reporters and State agencies,
Designated Representative holds an provide faster access to national
If a reporting source already reports electronic signature device that is emission data, and facilitate consistent
GHG emissions data to an existing EPA currently used for valid electronic QA.
program, the Agency would make efforts signatures accepted under another Under CAA Section 114(b), EPA may
to minimize any additional burden on Agency program, we propose that the delegate the authority to collect
the sources. Some existing programs, new reporting system would also accept emissions data from stationary sources
however, have data collection and valid electronic signatures executed to State agencies provided the State
reporting requirements that are with that device where feasible. (See 40 agency can satisfy the procedural
inconsistent with the proposed CFR 3.10 and the definitions of requirements. We seek comment on the
requirements for the mandatory GHG ‘‘electronic signature device’’ and ‘‘valid possibility of delegating the authority to
reporting rule. When it is not feasible to electronic signature’’ under 40 CFR 3.3.) State agencies that request such
adapt the existing program to collect the authority and assessing whether the
appropriate emissions data and 3. Unique Identifiers for Facilities and State agency has procedures that are
supplemental data, EPA proposes to Units deemed consistent and adequate with
require affected sources to submit the We believe that the Agency’s the procedures outlined in this rule. For
data in the requested format to the new reporting format for a given reporting example, how should EPA determine
data reporting system for the mandatory year could make use of several ID whether a requesting State agency has
GHG reporting rule. codes—unique codes for a unit or ‘‘consistent and adequate’’ procedures?
Emission sources may fall into one or facility. To ensure proper matching
more categories: 7. Submission Method
between databases, e.g., EPA-assigned
(1) Reporting sources that use existing facility ID codes and the ORIS (DOE) ID EPA proposes to require all sources
data collection and reporting methods code, and consistency from one affected by this rule to report in an
and would not be required to report reporting year to the next, we are electronic format to be specified by the
separately to the new data reporting proposing that the reporting system Administrator. Advantages of electronic
system for the GHG reporting rule. provide each facility with a unique reporting include reduced burden on
(2) Reporting sources that use existing identification code to be specified by reporters and EPA staff, greater accuracy
data collection and reporting methods the Administrator. because data do not need to be manually
but would be required to report the data entered by EPA staff, enhanced ability
separately to the new data reporting 4. Reporting Emissions in a Single Unit to conduct electronic audits to ensure
system for the GHG reporting rule. of Measure data quality, improved comparability
(3) Reporting sources that are not To maintain consistency with existing because data would be reported in a
currently required to collect and report State-level and Federal-level greenhouse consistent format, and improved data
GHG emissions data to EPA and would gas programs in the U.S. and availability for EPA and the public.
be required to report using the new data internationally, the Agency is proposing By not specifying the exact reporting
reporting system for the mandatory GHG that all emission measurements be in format in the regulatory text, EPA
reporting rule. the SI, also referred to as metric, units. maintains flexibility to modify the
EPA believes that using existing data Data used in calculations and reporting format and tools in a timely
collection methods and reporting supplemental data for QA could still be manner. Changes based on stakeholder
systems, when feasible, to collect data submitted in English weights and comment, implementation experience,
required by this proposed rule would measures (e.g., mmBtu/hr) but the and new technology could be executed
minimize additional burden on sources specific units of measure would be without regulatory action. EPA has used
and the Agency. We seek comment on included in the data submission. All this approach successfully with existing
the use of existing collection methods emissions data would be submitted to programs, such as the ARP and the Title
and reporting systems to collect the agency in kg or metric tons per unit VI Stratospheric Ozone Protection
information required by this proposed of time (per year in most cases, but for Program, facilitating the deployment of
rule. a few source categories emissions per new reporting formats and tools that
For those sources that do not report hour, day, month, quarter, or other unit take advantage of technologies (e.g.,
GHGs or data used to calculate GHG of time could also be required). XML) and reduce the burden on
emissions through an existing reporting reporters and the Agency. The
system, EPA proposes to develop a new 5. Conversion of Emissions to CO2e electronic reports submitted under this
system for emission reporters to submit Under this proposed rule, reporters rule would also be subject to the
the required data. The detailed data would submit the quantity of each provisions of 40 CFR 3.10, specifying
elements that would be reported and applicable GHG emitted (or other EPA systems to which electronic
other requirements are specified in metric) in two forms. The data would be submissions must be made and the
Sections III, IV and V of this preamble. in the form of quantity of the gas requirements for valid electronic
In general, reporters using this new emitted (e.g., metric tons of N2O) per signatures.
C. Data Management in scope or more aggressive in Therefore, State and local agencies
implementation than this proposal. In will serve an important role in
1. QA Procedures
order to be consistent with and communicating the requirements of the
The new reporting system would supportive of these programs and to rule and providing compliance
include automated checks for data reduce burden on reporters and program assistance. In concert with their routine
completeness, data quality, and data agencies, EPA proposes that it share inspection and other compliance and
consistency. Such automated checks are emission data with the exception of any enforcement activities for other CAA
used for many other Agency programs CBI data, as discussed in Section III.C of programs, State and local agencies also
(e.g., ARP). this preamble, with relevant agencies or can assist with educating facilities and
2. Providing Feedback to Reporters approved entities using, where assuring compliance at facilities subject
practical, shared tools and to this rule.
EPA has established a variety of infrastructure. As discussed in Section VI of this
mechanisms under existing programs to preamble, CAA section 114(b) allows
provide feedback to reporters who have VII. Compliance and Enforcement EPA to delegate to States the authority
submitted data to the Agency. EPA will to implement and enforce Federal rules.
A. Compliance Assistance
consider the approaches used by other At this time, however, EPA does not
programs (e.g., electronic confirmations, To facilitate implementation and propose to formally delegate
results of QA checks) and develop compliance, EPA plans to conduct an implementation of the rule to State and
appropriate mechanisms to provide active outreach and technical assistance local agencies. Even without delegation,
feedback to reporters for the GHG program following publication of the EPA will work with States to ease
reporting rule. The process is largely final rule. The primary audience would burden on reporters to State and Federal
dependent upon such factors as the type be potentially affected industries. We systems by harmonizing data
of data being submitted and the manner intend to develop implementation and management, where possible. Further,
of data transmission. Regardless of data outreach materials to help facilities as discussed in Section VI of this
collection system specifics, the goal is to understand if the rule applies to them preamble, EPA is proposing to make the
ensure appropriate transparency and and explain the reporting requirements data collected under this rule available
timeliness when providing feedback to and timetables. The program to States and other interested parties as
submitting entities. particularly would target industrial, soon as possible. For example, the
D. Data Dissemination commercial, and institutional sectors quarterly data reported to EPA under
that do not routinely deal with air Title IV of the CAA is often available on
1. Public Access to Emissions Data pollution regulations. EPA’s Web site within a month after it
The Agency proposes to publish data Compliance materials could be is reported. Furthermore, we recognize
submitted or collected under this tailored to the needs of various sectors. that many States with mandatory
rulemaking through EPA’s Web site, These materials might include, for reporting programs are members of TCR.
reports, and other formats, with the example, compliance guides, brochures, In some cases, TCR would provide
exception of any CBI data, as discussed fact sheets, frequently asked question States support in reporting tools,
in Section I.C of this preamble. This and answer documents, sample database management and serve as the
level of transparency would inform the reporting forms, and GHG emissions ultimate repository for data reported
public and facilitate greater data calculating tools. We also are under State programs, after the States
verification and review. Transparency considering a compliance assistance have verified the data. Given the
helps to ensure data quality and build hotline for answering questions and leadership many of the States have
public confidence in the data so the data providing technical assistance. (We may shown in developing and implementing
can be used to support the development also want to consider creating a GHG reporting and reduction programs,
of potential future climate policies or compliance assistance center (http:// EPA is seeking comment on the
programs. possibility of delegating the authority to
www.assistancecenters.net).) EPA
EPA proposes to disseminate the data collect data under this rule to State
requests comment on the types of
on an annual basis. Under this proposed agencies. Overall, we request comments
rule, affected sources would be required assistance needed and the most effective
mechanisms for delivering this on the role of States in implementing
to report at least on an annual basis,
assistance to various industry sectors. this rule and on how States and EPA
with some reporting more frequently to
could interact in administering the
existing data reporting programs (e.g., B. Role of the States reporting program.
the ARP). The Agency believes it would
be appropriate to post or publish data State and local air pollution control C. Enforcement
collected under this rule once a year agencies routinely interact with many of
Facilities that fail to report GHG
after the reporting deadline. The Agency the sources that would report under this
emissions according to the requirements
recognizes the high level of public rule. Further, as mentioned in Section II
of the proposed rule could potentially
interest in this data, and proposes to of this preamble, many States have
be subject to enforcement action by EPA
disclose it in a timely manner, while already implemented or are in the
under CAA sections 113 and 203–205.
also assuring accuracy. process of implementing mandatory
The CAA provides for several levels of
GHG reporting and reduction programs.
2. Sharing Emission Data With Other enforcement that include
In fact, many States may have reporting
Agencies administrative, civil, and criminal
programs that are broader in scope or
penalties. The CAA allows for
There are a growing number of more aggressive in implementation
injunctive relief to compel compliance
programs at the State, Tribe, Territory, because those programs are either
and civil and administrative penalties of
and Local level that require emission components of established reduction
up to $32,500 per day.136
sources in their respective jurisdictions programs (e.g., cap and trade) or being
to monitor and report GHG emissions. used to design and inform specific 136 The Federal Civil Penalties Inflation
These programs would likely still complementary measures (e.g., energy Adjustment Act of 1990, Public Law 101–410, 104
continue because they may be broader efficiency). Continued
Deviations from the rule that could The costs include labor costs for To develop the costs for the rule, EPA
ultimately be considered violations performing the monitoring, estimated the number of affected
include but are not limited to the recordkeeping, and reporting activities facilities in each source category, the
following: necessary to comply with the proposed number and types of combustion units
• Failure to report GHG emissions. rule. For some affected facilities, costs at each facility, the number and types of
• Failure to collect data needed to include costs to monitor, record, and production processes that emit GHGs,
estimate GHG emissions. report emissions of GHGs from process inputs and outputs (especially
• Failure to continuously monitor production processes and from for monitoring procedures that involve
and test as required. Note that merely stationary combustion units. For other a carbon mass balance), and the
filling in missing data as specified does facilities, the only emissions of GHGs measurements that are already being
not excuse a failure to perform the are from stationary combustion. EPA’s made for reasons not associated with the
monitoring or testing. estimated costs of compliance are proposed rule (to allow only the
• Failure to keep records needed to discussed in greater detail below: incremental costs to be estimated).
verify GHG emissions estimates. Labor Costs. The costs of complying Many of the affected sources categories,
• Failure to estimate GHG emissions with and administering this proposed especially those that are the largest
according to the methodology(s) rule include time of managers, emitters of GHGs (e.g., electric utilities,
specified in the rule. technical, and administrative staff in industrial boilers, petroleum refineries,
• Falsification of reports. both the private sector and the public cement plants, iron and steel
VIII. Economic Impacts of the Proposed sector. Staff hours are estimated for production, pulp and paper) are subject
Rule activities, including: to national emission standards and we
• Monitoring (private): Staff hours to use data generated in the development
This section of the preamble examines operate and maintain emissions of these standards to estimate the
the costs and economic impacts of the monitoring systems. number of sources affected by the
proposed rule, including the estimated • Reporting (private): Staff hours to reporting rule.
costs and benefits of the proposed rule, gather and process available data and Other components of the cost analysis
and the estimated economic impacts of reporting it to EPA through electronic included estimates of labor hours to
the proposed rule on affected entities, systems. perform specific activities, cost of labor,
including estimated impacts on small • Assuring and releasing data and cost of monitoring equipment.
entities. Complete detail of the (public): Staff hours to quality assure, Estimates of labor hours were based on
economic impacts of the proposed rule analyze, and release reports. previous analyses of the costs of
can be found in the text of the Staff activities and associated labor monitoring, reporting, and
regulatory impact analysis (RIA) (EPA– costs would potentially vary over time. recordkeeping for other rules;
HQ–OAR–2008–0318–002). Thus, cost estimates are developed for information from the industry
A. How are compliance costs estimated? start-up and first-time reporting, and characterization on the number of units
subsequent reporting. Wage rates to or process inputs and outputs to be
EPA estimated costs of complying monetize staff time are obtained from monitored; and engineering judgment
with the proposed rule for process the BLS. by industry and EPA industry experts
emissions of GHGs in each affected Equipment Costs. Equipment costs and engineers. Labor costs were taken
industrial facility, as well as emissions include both the initial purchase price from the BLS and adjusted to account
from stationary combustion sources at of monitoring equipment and any for overhead. Monitoring costs were
industrial facilities and other facilities, facility/process modification that may generally based on cost algorithms or
and emissions of GHGs from mobile be required. For example, the cost approaches that had been previously
sources. 2006 is the representative year estimation method for mobile sources developed, reviewed, accepted as
of the analysis in that the annual costs involves upstream measurement by the adequate, and used specifically to
were estimated using the 2006 vehicle manufacturers. This may require estimate the costs associated with
population of emitting sources. EPA an upgrade to their test equipment and various types of measurements and
used available industry and EPA data to facility. Based on expert judgment, the monitoring.
characterize conditions at affected engineering costs analyses annualized A detailed engineering analysis was
sources. Incremental monitoring, capital equipment costs with the conducted for each subpart of the
recordkeeping, and reporting activities appropriate lifetime and interest rate proposed rule to develop unique unit
were then identified for each type of assumptions. Cost recovery periods and costs. This analysis is documented in
facility and the associated costs were interest rates vary by industry, but the RIA. The TSDs for each source
estimated. typically, one-time capital costs are category provide a discussion of the
The costs of complying with the amortized over a 10-year cost recovery applicable measurement technologies
proposed rule would vary from one period at a rate of 7 percent. and any existing programs and
facility to another, depending on the practices. Section 4 of the RIA contains
types of emissions, the number of B. What are the costs of this proposed a description of the engineering cost
affected sources at the facility, existing rule? analysis.
monitoring, recordkeeping, and For the cost analysis, EPA gathered Table VIII–1 of this preamble presents
reporting activities at the facility, etc. existing data from EPA, industry trade by subpart: The number of entities, the
associations, States, and publicly downstream emissions covered, the first
Stat. 890, 28 U.S.C. 2461, note, as amended by available data sources (e.g., labor rates year capital costs and the first year
Section 31001(s)(1) of the Debt Collection
Improvement Act of 1996, Public Law 104–134, 110
from the BLS) to characterize the annualized costs of the proposed rule.
Stat. 1321–373, April 26, 1996, requires EPA and processes, sources, sectors, facilities, EPA estimates that the total national
other agencies to adjust the ordinary maximum and companies/entities affected. Costs annualized cost for the first year is $168
penalty that it will apply when assessing a civil were estimated on a per entity basis and million, and the total national
penalty for a violation. Accordingly, EPA has
adjusted the CAA’s provision in Section 113(b) and
then weighted by the number of entities annualized cost for subsequent years is
(d) specifying $25,000 per day of violation for civil affected at the 25,000 metric tons CO2e $134 million (2006$). Of these costs,
violations to $32,500 per day of violation. threshold. roughly 5 percent fall upon the public
sector for program administration, while of entities excluded increases with one threshold option to the next. The
95 percent fall upon the private sector. higher thresholds. Table VIII–2 of this third metric shown is the marginal cost
General stationary combustion sources, preamble provides the cost-effectiveness of reported emissions. For this analysis,
which are widely distributed analysis for the various thresholds. the marginal cost of reporting indicates
throughout the economy, are estimated Three metrics are used to evaluate the the cost per metric ton of each threshold
to incur approximately 18 percent of cost-effectiveness of the emissions option relative to the 25,000 metric ton
ongoing costs; other sectors incurring threshold. The first is the average cost CO2e proposed threshold). For more
relatively large shares of costs are oil per metric ton of emissions reported ($/ information about the first year capital
and natural gas systems (21 percent of metric ton CO2e). The second metric for costs (unamortized), project lifetime and
ongoing costs), and iron and steel evaluating the threshold option is the the amortized (annualized) costs for
manufacturing (11 percent). incremental cost of reporting emissions. each subpart, please refer to section 4 of
The threshold, in large part, The incremental cost is calculated as the the RIA and the RIA cost appendix. Not
determines the number of entities additional (incremental) cost per metric all subparts require capital expenditures
required to report GHG emissions and ton starting with the least stringent but those that do are clearly
hence the costs of the rule. The number option and moving successively from documented in the RIA.
TABLE VIII–1. ESTIMATED COVERED ENTITIES, EMISSIONS AND COSTS BY SUBPART (2006$)
Downstream emissions First year capital costs First year total annualized
Number of costs 2
Subpart covered (Million of Share Share
entities MtCO2e) (%) (Million) (%) (Million) Share
(%)
Subpart A—General Provisions

Subpart B—Reserved
Subpart C—General Stationary Fuel
Combustion Sources ............................ 3,000 220.0 6 $12.7 15 $29.0 17
Subpart D—Electricity Generation ........... 1,108 2,262.0 58 0.0 0 3.3 2
Subpart E—Adipic Acid Production ......... 4 9.3 0 0.0 0 0.1 0
Subpart F—Aluminum Production ........... 14 6.4 0 0.0 0 0.4 0
Subpart G—Ammonia Manufacturing ...... 24 14.5 0 0.0 0 0.4 0
Subpart H—Cement Production .............. 107 86.8 2 5.4 6 6.9 4
Subpart I—Electronics Manufacturing ..... 96 5.7 0 0.0 0 3.6 2
Subpart J—Ethanol Production ............... 85 0.0 0 0.3 0 0.5 0
Subpart K—Ferroalloy Production ........... 9 2.3 0 0.0 0 0.3 0
Subpart L—Fluorinated Gas Production .. 12 5.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 0
Subpart M—Food Processing .................. 113 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.6 0
Subpart N—Glass Production .................. 55 2.2 0 0.0 0 0.6 0
Subpart O—HCFC–22 Production ........... 3 13.8 0 0.0 0 0.0 0
Subpart P—Hydrogen Production ........... 41 15.0 0 0.0 0 0.6 0
Subpart Q—Iron and Steel Production .... 121 85.0 2 0.0 0 18.2 11
Subpart R—Lead Production ................... 13 0.8 0 0.0 0 0.3 0
Subpart S—Lime Manufacturing .............. 89 25.4 1 4.9 6 5.3 3
Subpart T—Magnesium Production ......... 11 2.9 0 0.0 0 0.1 0
Subpart U—Miscellaneous Uses of Car-
bonates ................................................. 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0
Subpart V—Nitric Acid Production ........... 45 17.7 0 0.2 0 0.9 1
Subpart W—Oil and Natural Gas Sys-
tems ...................................................... 1,375 129.9 3 37.8 43 32.5 19
Subpart X—Petrochemical Production .... 88 54.8 1 0.0 0 1.6 1
Subpart Y—Petroleum Refineries ............ 150 204.7 5 1.6 2 3.7 2
Subpart Z—Phosphoric Acid Production 14 3.8 0 0.8 1 0.8 0
Subpart AA—Pulp and Paper Manufac-
turing ..................................................... 425 57.7 1 14.8 17 9.2 5
Subpart BB—Silicon Carbide Production 1 0.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 0
Subpart CC—Soda Ash Manufacturing ... 5 3.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 0
Subpart DD—Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6)
from Electric Power Systems ............... 141 10.3 0 0.0 0 0.4 0
Subpart EE—Titanium Dioxide Produc-
tion ........................................................ 8 3.7 0 0.0 0 0.1 0
Subpart FF—Underground Coal Mines ... 100 33.5 1 0.6 1 2.3 1
Subpart GG—Zinc Production ................. 5 0.8 0 0.0 0 0.1 0
Subpart HH—Landfills ............................. 2,551 91.1 2 7.9 9 15.3 9
Subpart II—Wastewater ........................... 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0
Subpart JJ—Manure Management .......... 43 1.5 0 0.0 0 0.2 0
Subpart KK—Suppliers of Coal and
Coal-based Products & Subpart LL—
Suppliers of Coal-based Liquid Fuels .. 1,237 (1) 0 0.0 0 11.0 7
Subpart MM—Suppliers of Petroleum
Products ............................................... 214 (1) 0 0.0 0 2.0 1
Subpart NN—Suppliers of Natural Gas
and Natural Gas Liquids ...................... 1,554 (1) 0 0.0 0 2.1 1
Subpart OO—Suppliers of Industrial
Greenhouse Gases .............................. 121 464.1 12 0.0 0 0.4 0
TABLE VIII–1. ESTIMATED COVERED ENTITIES, EMISSIONS AND COSTS BY SUBPART (2006$)—Continued
Downstream emissions First year capital costs First year total annualized
Number of costs 2
Subpart covered (Million of Share Share
entities MtCO2e) (%) (Million) (%) (Million) Share
(%)
Subpart PP—Suppliers of Carbon Diox-

ide (CO2) .............................................. 13 (1) 0 0.0 0 0.0 0
Subpart QQ—Motor Vehicle and Engine
Manufacturers ....................................... 350 35.4 1 0.0 0 7.4 4
Private Sector, Total ................................ 13,205 3,869.9 100 87.1 100 160.4 95
Public Sector, Total .................................. NA NA NA NA NA 8.0 5
Total .................................................. 13,205 3,869.9 100 87.1 100 168.4 100

1 Emissions from upstream facilities are excluded from these estimates to avoid double counting.
2 Totalcosts include labor and capital costs incurred in the first year. Capital Costs are annualized using appropriate equipment lifetime and in-
terest rate (see additional details in RIA section 4).
TABLE VIII–2. THRESHOLD COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS (2006$)

Million Percentage Average Incremental Marginal
Entities Total costs metric tons of total cost cost cost *
Threshold (metric tons CO2e) (covered) (million $) CO2e/year emissions ($/metric ($/metric ($/metric
(covered) reported ton) ton) ton)
100,000 .................................................... 6,598 $101 3,699 52 $0.03 — ¥$0.35

25,000 ...................................................... 13,205 160 3,870 55 0.04 $0.35 —
10,000 ...................................................... 20,765 213 3,916 56 0.05 1.16 1.16
1,000 ........................................................ 59,587 426 3,951 56 0.11 6.09 3.29
* Cost per metric ton relative to the selected option.
Table VIII–3 of this preamble presents Most upstream facilities (e.g., coal metric tons CO2e threshold for a cost of
costs broken out by upstream and mines, refineries, etc.) are also direct approximately $36 million. However, it
downstream sources. Upstream sources emitters of GHGs and are included in should be noted that due to data
include the fuel suppliers and industrial the downstream side of the table. As limitations the coverage estimates for
GHG suppliers. Downstream suppliers shown in Table VIII–3 of this preamble, upstream and downstream source
include combustion sources, industrial over 99 percent of industrial processes categories are approximations.
processes, and biological processes. emissions are covered at the 25,000
TABLE VIII–3. UPSTREAM VERSUS DOWNSTREAM COSTS

Upstream 1 Downstream 2 3 4
Emissions
Emissions First year First year
No. of No. of cov-
Source category coverage cost Source category cost 3
Reporters (%) 10 (millions) Reporters 2 erage 3 10 (millions)
(%)
Coal Supply ...................... 1,237 100.0 $11.03 Coal 5 6 Combustion .......... N/A 99.0 N/A
Petroleum Supply ............. 214 100.0 1.99 Petroleum 5 Combustion 10 N/A 20.0 N/A
Natural Gas Supply .......... 1,554 68.0 2.14 Natural Gas 5 Combustion N/A 23.0 N/A
Sub Total Combustion ...... 4,108 5 N/A 46.16
Industrial Gas Supply ....... 133 99.91 0.41 Industrial Gas Consump- 265 28.0 3.70
tion.
Industrial Processes ......... 1,077 99.6 36.12
Fugitive Emissions (coal, 1,475 86.6 34.86
oil and gas).
Biological Processes ........ 2,792 55.5 16.59
Vehicle 7 and Engine Man- 350 84.0 7.41
ufacturers 9.
Notes:
1 Most upstream facilities (e.g., coal mines, refineries, etc.) are also direct emitters of greenhouse gases, and are included in the downstream
side of the table.
2 Estimating the total number of downstream reporters by summing the rows will result in double-counting because some facilities are included
in more than one row due to multiple types of emissions (e.g., facilities that burn fossil fuel and have process/fugitive/biological emissions will be
included in each downstream category).
3 The coverage and costs for downstream reporters apply to the specific source category, i.e., the fixed costs are not ‘‘double-counted’’ in both
stationary combustion and industrial processes for the same facility.
4 The thresholds used to determine covered facilities are additive, i.e., all of the source categories located at a facility (e.g., stationary combus-
tion and process emissions) are added together to determine whether a facility meets the proposed threshold (e.g., 25,000 metric tons of CO2e/
yr).
5 Estimates for the number of reporters and total cost for downstream stationary combustion do not distinguish between fuels. National level
data on the number of reporters could be estimated. However, estimating the number of reporters by fuel was not possible because a single fa-
cility can combust multiple fuels. For these reasons there is not a reliable estimate of the total of the emissions coverage from the downstream
stationary combustion.
6 Approximately 90 percent of downstream coal combustion emissions are already reported to EPA through requirements for electricity gener-
ating units under the Acid Rain Program.
7 Due to data limitations, the coverage for downstream sources for fuel and industrial gas consumption in this table does not take into account
thresholds. Assuming full emissions coverage for each source slightly over-states the actual coverage that would result from this rule. To esti-
mate total emissions coverage downstream, by fuel, we added total emissions resulting from the respective fuel combusted in the industrial and
electricity generation sectors and divided that by total national GHG emissions from the combustion of that fuel.
8 The percent of coverage here is percentage of vehicle and engine manufacturers covered by this proposal rather than emissions coverage.
This rule proposes to collect an emissions rate for the four ‘‘transportation-related’’ GHG emissions (CO2, CH4, N2O and HFCs). The amounts of
CH4 and N2O are dependent on factors other than fuel characteristics such as combustion temperatures, air-fuel mixes, and use of pollution con-
trol equipment.
9 The emissions coverage for petroleum combustion includes combustion of fuel by transportation sources as well as other uses of petroleum
(e.g., home heating oil). It cannot be broken out by transportation versus other uses as there are difficulties associated with tracking which prod-
ucts from petroleum refiners are used for transportation fuel and which were not. We know that although refiners make these designations for the
products leaving their gate, the actual end use can and does change in the market. For example, designated transportation fuel can always be
used as home heating oil.
10 Emissions coverage from the combustion of fossil fuels upstream represents CO emissions only. It is not possible to estimate nitrous oxide
2
and methane emissions without knowing where and how the fuel is combusted. In the case of downstream emissions from stationary combustion
of fossil fuels, nitrous oxide and methane emissions are included in the emissions coverage estimate. They represent approximately 1 percent of
the total emissions.
11 EPA estimates that the majority of the costs for manufacturers of vehicles and engines can be attributed to the reporting requirements for
non-CO2 gases.
C. What are the economic impacts of the a screening assessment, comparing the unlikely to result in significant changes
proposed rule? estimated total annualized compliance in firms’ production decisions or other
EPA prepared an economic impact costs by industry, where industry is behavioral changes, and thus unlikely to
analysis to evaluate the impacts of the defined in terms of North American result in significant changes in prices or
proposed rule on affected industries and Industry Classification System (NAICS) quantities in affected markets. Thus,
economic sectors. In evaluating the code, with industry average revenues. EPA followed its Guidelines for
various reporting options considered, Overall national costs of the rule are Preparing Economic Analyses (EPA,
EPA conducted a cost-effectiveness significant because there are a large 2002, p. 124–125) and used the
analysis, comparing the cost per metric number of affected entities, but per- engineering cost estimates to measure
ton of GHG emissions across reporting entity costs are low. Average cost-to- the social cost of the proposed rule,
options. EPA used this information to sales ratios for establishments in rather than modeling market responses
identify the preferred options described affected NAICS codes are uniformly less and using the resulting measures of
in today’s proposed rule. than 0.8 percent. social cost. Table VIII–4 of this
To estimate the economic impacts of These low average cost-to-sales ratios preamble summarizes cost-to-sales
the proposed rule, EPA first conducted indicate that the proposed rule is ratios for affected industries.
TABLE VIII–4. ESTIMATED COST-TO-SALES RATIOS FOR AFFECTED ENTITIES

Average Average
cost per entity cost-
NAICS NAICS description entity to-sales
($1,000/ ratio 1
entity)
211 ............................................... Oil & gas extraction ............................................................................................... $23 0.1%

212 ............................................... Mining (except oil & gas) ....................................................................................... 10 0.1
221 ............................................... Utilities ................................................................................................................... 1 <0.1
322 ............................................... Paper mfg .............................................................................................................. 22 0.1
324 ............................................... Petroleum & coal products mfg ............................................................................. 16 <0.1
325 ............................................... Chemical mfg ......................................................................................................... 12 <0.1
327 ............................................... Nonmetallic mineral product mfg ........................................................................... 51 0.8
331 ............................................... Primary metal mfg ................................................................................................. 112 0.4
334 ............................................... Computer & electronic product mfg ....................................................................... 37 0.1
335 ............................................... Electrical equipment, appliance, & component mfg .............................................. 37 0.2
486 ............................................... Pipeline transportation ........................................................................................... 12 0.1
562 ............................................... Waste management & remediation services ......................................................... 6 0.2
325199 ......................................... All other basic organic chemical mfg .................................................................... 24 <0.1
325311 ......................................... Nitrogenous fertilizer mfg ....................................................................................... 19 0.1
327310 ......................................... Cement mfg ........................................................................................................... 65 0.2
331112 ......................................... Electrometallurgical ferroalloy product mfg ........................................................... 28 <0.1
3272 ............................................. Glass & glass product mfg .................................................................................... 11 0.1
325120 ......................................... Industrial gas mfg .................................................................................................. 3 <0.1
331112 ......................................... Electrometallurgical ferroalloy product mfg ........................................................... 150 0.3
3314 ............................................. Nonferrous metal (except aluminum) production & processing ............................ 23 0.1
327410 ......................................... Lime mfg ................................................................................................................ 60 0.4
325311 ......................................... Nitrogenous fertilizer mfg ....................................................................................... 20 0.1
324110 ......................................... Petroleum refineries ............................................................................................... 19 <0.1
325312 ......................................... Phosphatic fertilizer mfg ........................................................................................ 60 0.1
322110 ......................................... Pulp mills ............................................................................................................... 22 <0.1
324110 ......................................... Petroleum refineries ............................................................................................... 24 <0.1
TABLE VIII–4. ESTIMATED COST-TO-SALES RATIOS FOR AFFECTED ENTITIES—Continued

Average Average
cost per entity cost-
NAICS NAICS description entity to-sales
($1,000/ ratio 1
entity)
327910 ......................................... Abrasive product mfg ............................................................................................. 11 0.1

3251 ............................................. Basic chemical mfg ................................................................................................ 9 <0.1
325188 ......................................... All other basic inorganic chemical mfg .................................................................. 9 <0.1
3314 ............................................. Nonferrous metal (except aluminum) production & processing ............................ 19 0.1
1 This ratio reflects first year costs. Subsequent year costs will be slightly lower because they do not include initial start-up activities.
D. What are the impacts of the proposed sufficiently captures the majority of owned by small businesses. This ratio
rule on small entities? GHG emissions in the U.S., while constitutes a ‘‘sales’’ test that computes
excluding smaller facilities and sources. the annualized compliance costs of this
As required by the RFA and SBREFA, For small facilities that are captured by proposed rule as a percentage of sales
EPA assessed the potential impacts of the rule, EPA has proposed simplified
the proposed rule on small entities and determines whether the ratio
emission estimation methods where exceeds some level (e.g., 1 percent or 3
(small businesses, governments, and feasible (e.g., stationary combustion
non-profit organizations). (See Section percent).137 The cost-to-sales ratios were
equipment under a certain rating can constructed at the establishment level
IX.C of this preamble for definitions of use a simplified mass balance approach
small entities.) (average reporting program costs per
as opposed to more rigorous direct
EPA believes the proposed thresholds establishment/average establishment
monitoring) to keep the burden of
maximize the rule coverage with 85 to receipts) for several business size
reporting as low as possible. For further
90 percent of U.S. GHG emissions detail on the rationale for excluding ranges. This allowed EPA to account for
reported by approximately 13,205 small entities through threshold receipt differences between
reporters, while keeping reporting selection please see the Thresholds TSD establishments owned by large and
burden to a minimum and excluding (EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–046). small businesses and differences in
small emitters. Furthermore, many EPA conducted a screening small business definitions across
industry stakeholders that EPA met with assessment comparing compliance costs affected industries. The results of the
expressed support for a 25,000 metric for affected industry sectors to industry- screening assessment are shown in
ton CO2e threshold because it specific receipts data for establishments Table VIII–5 of this preamble.
TABLE VIII–5. ESTIMATED COST-TO-SALES RATIOS BY INDUSTRY AND ENTERPRISE SIZE a
Owned by enterprises with:
SBA Size Average
standard cost per All enter- 1,000 to
20 to 99 100 to 500 to 750 to
Industry NAICS NAICS description (effective entity prises <20 1,499
Employ- 499 Em- 749 Em- 999 Em-
March 11, ($1,000/ (%) Employ- Employ-
ees ployees ployees ployees
2008) entity) ees f ees
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
Oil and Gas Extrac- 211 Oil & gas extraction 500 $23 0.1 1.5 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
tion.
Petroleum and Coal 212 Mining (except oil & 500 10 0.1 0.9 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Products. gas).
SF6 from Electrical 221 Utilities ................... (b) 1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Systems.
Pulp & Paper Man- 322 Paper mfg .............. 500 to 22 0.1 1.3 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0
ufacturing. 750
Petroleum and Coal 324 Petroleum & coal (c) 16 0.0 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0
Products. products mfg.
Chemical Manufac- 325 Chemical mfg ........ 500 to 12 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
turing. 1,000
Cement & Other 327 Nonmetallic mineral 500 to 51 0.8 4.9 1.0 0.5 0.4 0.6 0.4
Mineral Produc- product mfg. 1,000
tion.
Primary Metal Man- 331 Primary metal mfg 500 to 112 0.4 9.1 1.4 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.2
ufacturing. 1,000
Computer and 334 Computer & elec- 500 to 37 0.1 2.9 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Electronic Prod- tronic product 1,000
uct Manufac- mfg.
turing.
Electrical Equip- 335 Electrical equip- 500 to 37 0.2 2.9 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
ment, Appliance, ment, appliance, 1,000
and Component & component
Manufacturing. mfg.
Oil & Natural Gas 486 Pipeline transpor- (d) 12 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.4 NA NA NA
Transportation. tation.
137 EPA’s RFA guidance for rule writers suggests quantitative metric for economic impact screening
the ‘‘sales’’ test continues to be the preferred analysis.
TABLE VIII–5. ESTIMATED COST-TO-SALES RATIOS BY INDUSTRY AND ENTERPRISE SIZE a—Continued
Owned by enterprises with:
SBA Size Average
standard cost per All enter- 20 to 99 100 to 500 to 750 to 1,000 to
Industry NAICS NAICS description (effective entity prises <20 Employ- 499 Em- 749 Em- 999 Em- 1,499
March 11, ($1,000/ (%) Employ- ees ployees ployees ployees Employ-
2008) entity) ees f (%) (%) (%) (%) ees
(%)
Waste Manage- 562 Waste manage- (e) 6 0.2 0.9 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1
ment and Reme- ment & remedi-
diation Services. ation services.
Adipic Acid ............. 325199 All other basic or- 1,000 24 0.0 0.9 0.3 0.1 NA 0.0 NA
ganic chemical
mfg.
Ammonia ............... 325311 Nitrogenous fer- 1,000 19 0.1 1.0 0.6 NA NA NA NA
tilizer mfg.
Cement .................. 327310 Cement mfg ........... 750 65 0.2 2.1 1.6 0.3 NA NA 0.1
Ferroalloys ............. 331112 Electrometallurgical 750 28 0.0 NA NA NA NA NA NA
ferroalloy product
mfg.
Glass ..................... 3272 Glass & glass prod- 500 to 11 0.1 1.7 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0
uct mfg. 1,000
Hydrogen Produc- 325120 Industrial gas mfg .. 1,000 3 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.1 NA NA NA
tion.
Iron and Steel ........ 331112 Electrometallurgical 750 150 0.3 NA NA NA NA NA NA
ferroalloy product
mfg.
Lead Production .... 3314 Nonferrous metal 750 to 23 0.1 1.5 0.2 0.1 NA NA 0.1
(except alu- 1,000
minum) produc-
tion & processing.
Lime Manufacturing 327410 Lime mfg ............... 500 60 0.4 16.5 1.2 NA NA NA NA
Nitric Acid .............. 325311 Nitrogenous fer- 1,000 20 0.1 1.0 0.6 NA NA NA NA
tilizer mfg.
Petrochemical ........ 324110 Petroleum refin- (c) 19 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 NA NA
eries.
Phosphoric Acid .... 325312 Phosphatic fertilizer 500 60 0.1 10.1 NA NA NA NA NA
mfg.
Pulp and Paper ..... 322110 Pulp mills ............... 750 22 0.0 1.5 NA NA NA NA NA
Refineries .............. 324110 Petroleum refin- (c) 24 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 NA NA
eries.
Silicon Carbide ...... 327910 Abrasive product 500 11 0.1 0.8 0.2 0.1 NA NA NA
mfg.
Soda Ash Manufac- 3251 Basic chemical mfg 500 to 9 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
turing. 1,000
Titanium Dioxide .... 325188 All other basic inor- 1,000 9 0.0 0.7 0.4 0.1 NA NA NA
ganic chemical
mfg.
Zinc Production ..... 3314 Nonferrous metal 750 to 19 0.1 1.2 0.1 0.1 NA NA 0.1
(except alu- 1,000
minum) produc-
tion & processing.
a The Census Bureau defines an enterprise as a business organization consisting of one or more domestic establishments that were specified under common own-
ership or control. The enterprise and the establishment are the same for single-establishment firms. Each multi-establishment company forms one enterprise—the en-
terprise employment and annual payroll are summed from the associated establishments. Enterprise size designations are determined by the summed employment of
all associated establishments. Since the SBA’s business size definitions (http://www.sba.gov/size) apply to an establishment’s ultimate parent company, we assume in
this analysis that the enterprise definition above is consistent with the concept of ultimate parent company that is typically used for SBREFA screening analyses.
b NAICS codes 221111, 221112, 221113, 221119, 221121, 221122—A firm is small if, including its affiliates, it is primarily engaged in the generation, transmission,
and/or distribution of electric energy for sale and its total electric output for the preceding fiscal year did not exceed 4 million MW hours.
c 500 to 1,500. For NAICS code 324110—For purposes of Government procurement, the petroleum refiner must be a concern that has no more than 1,500 employ-
ees nor more than 125,000 barrels per calendar day total Operable Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation capacity. Capacity includes owned or leased facilities as well as
facilities under a processing agreement or an arrangement such as an exchange agreement or a throughput. The total product to be delivered under the contract
must be at least 90 percent refined by the successful bidder from either crude oil or bona fide feedstocks.
d NAICS codes 486110 = 1,500 employees; NAICS 486210 = $6.5 million annual receipts; NAICS 486910 = 1,500 employees; and NAICS 486990 = $11.5 million
annual receipts.
e Ranges from $6.5 to $13.0 million annual receipts; Environmental Remediation services has a 500 employee definition and the following criteria. NAICS 562910—
Environmental Remediation Services:
(1) For SBA assistance as a small business concern in the industry of Environmental Remediation Services, other than for Government procurement, a concern
must be engaged primarily in furnishing a range of services for the remediation of a contaminated environment to an acceptable condition including, but not limited to,
preliminary assessment, site inspection, testing, remedial investigation, feasibility studies, remedial design, containment, remedial action, removal of contaminated
materials, storage of contaminated materials and security and site closeouts. If one of such activities accounts for 50 percent or more of a concern’s total revenues,
employees, or other related factors, the concern’s primary industry is that of the particular industry and not the Environmental Remediation Services Industry.
(2) For purposes of classifying a Government procurement as Environmental Remediation Services, the general purpose of the procurement must be to restore a
contaminated environment and also the procurement must be composed of activities in three or more separate industries with separate NAICS codes or, in some in-
stances (e.g., engineering), smaller sub-components of NAICS codes with separate, distinct size standards. These activities may include, but are not limited to, sepa-
rate activities in industries such as: Heavy Construction; Special Trade Construction; Engineering Services; Architectural Services; Management Services; Refuse
Systems; Sanitary Services, Not Elsewhere Classified; Local Trucking Without Storage; Testing Laboratories; and Commercial, Physical and Biological Research. If
any activity in the procurement can be identified with a separate NAICS code, or component of a code with a separate distinct size standard, and that industry ac-
counts for 50 percent or more of the value of the entire procurement, then the proper size standard is the one for that particular industry, and not the Environmental
Remediation Service size standard.
f Given the Agency’s selected thresholds, enterprises with fewer than 20 employees are likely to be excluded from the reporting program.
NA: Not available. SUSB did not report the data necessary to calculate this ratio.
EPA was not able to calculate a cost- Although this rule would not have a on their relevance to policy making,
to-sales ratio for manure management significant economic impact on a transparency issues, and market
(NAICS 112) as SUSB (SBA, 2008a) data substantial number of small entities, the efficiency, and therefore benefits would
does not provide establishment Agency nonetheless tried to reduce the be very difficult to quantify and
information for agricultural NAICS impact of this rule on small entities, monetize. Instead of a quantitative
codes (e.g., NAICS 112 which covers including seeking input from a wide analysis of the benefits, EPA conducted
manure management). EPA estimates range of private- and public-sector a systematic literature review of existing
that the total first year reporting costs stakeholders. When developing the studies including government,
for the entire manure management proposed rule, the Agency took special consulting, and scholarly reports.
industry to be $0.2 million with an steps to ensure that the burdens A mandatory reporting system would
average cost per ton reported of $0.14. imposed on small entities were benefit the public by increased
As shown, the cost-to-sales ratios are minimal. The Agency conducted several transparency of facility emissions data.
less than 1 percent for establishments meetings with industry trade Transparent, public data on emissions
owned by small businesses that EPA associations to discuss regulatory allows for accountability of polluters to
considers most likely to be covered by options and the corresponding burden the public stakeholders who bear the
the reporting program (e.g. on industry, such as recordkeeping and cost of the pollution. Citizens,
establishments owned by businesses reporting. The Agency investigated community groups, and labor unions
with 20 or more employees). alternative thresholds and analyzed the have made use of data from Pollutant
EPA acknowledges that several marginal costs associated with requiring Release and Transfer Registers to
enterprise categories have ratios that smaller entities with lower emissions to negotiate directly with polluters to
exceed this threshold (e.g., enterprise report. The Agency also recommended a lower emissions, circumventing greater
with one to 20 employees). EPA took a hybrid method for reporting, which government regulation. Publicly
conservative approach with the model provides flexibility to entities and helps available emissions data also would
entity analysis. Although the minimize reporting costs. allow individuals to alter their
appropriate SBA size definition should Additional analysis for a model small consumption habits based on the GHG
be applied at the parent company government also showed that the emissions of producers.
(enterprise) level, data limitations annualized reporting program costs The greatest benefit of mandatory
allowed us only to compute and were less than 1 percent of revenue. reporting of industry GHG emissions to
compare ratios for a model These impacts are likely representative government would be realized in
establishment within several enterprise of ratios in industries where data developing future GHG policies. For
size ranges. To assess the likelihood that limitations do not allow EPA to example, in the EU’s Emissions Trading
these small businesses would be compute sales tests (e.g., general System, a lack of accurate monitoring at
covered by the rule, we performed stationary combustion and manure the facility level before establishing CO2
management). Potential impacts of the allowance permits resulted in allocation
several case studies for manufacturing
proposed rule on small governments of permits for emissions levels an
industries where the cost-to-receipt ratio
were assessed separately from impacts average of 15 percent above actual levels
exceeded 1 percent. For each industry,
on Federal Agencies. Small in every country except the United
we used and applied emission data from
governments and small non-profit Kingdom.
a recent study examining emission
organizations may be affected if they Benefits to industry of GHG emissions
thresholds.138 This study provides
own affected stationary combustion monitoring include the value of having
industry-average CO2 emission rates
sources, landfills, or natural gas independent, verifiable data to present
(e.g., tons per employee) for these
suppliers. However, the estimated costs to the public to demonstrate appropriate
manufacturing industries. under the proposed rule are estimated to
The case studies showed two environmental stewardship. Such
be small enough that no small monitoring allows for inclusion of
industries (cement and lime government or small non-profit is
manufacturing) where emission rates standardized GHG data into
estimated to incur significant impacts. environmental management systems,
suggest small businesses of this For example, from the 2002 Census (in
employment size could potentially be providing the necessary information to
$2006), revenues for small governments achieve and disseminate their
covered by the rule. As a result, EPA (counties and municipalities) with
examined corporate structures and environmental achievements.
populations fewer than 10,000 are $3 Standardization would also be a
ultimate parent companies were million, and revenues for local
identified using industry surveys and benefit to industry, once facilities invest
governments with populations less than in the institutional knowledge and
the latest private databases such as Dun 50,000 is $7 million. As an upper bound
& Bradstreet. The results of this analysis systems to report emissions, the cost of
estimate, summing typical per- monitoring should fall and the accuracy
show cost to sales ratios below 1 respondent costs of combustion plus
percent. of the accounting should improve. A
landfills plus natural gas suppliers standardized reporting program would
For the other enterprise categories yields a cost of approximately $17,047
identified with ratios between 1 percent also allow for facilities to benchmark
per local government. Thus, for the themselves against similar facilities to
and 3 percent EPA examined industry smallest group of local governments
specific bottom up databases and understand better their relative standing
(<10,000 people), cost-to-revenue ratio within their industry.
previous industry specific studies to would be 0.8 percent. For the larger
ensure that no entities with less than 20 group of governments less than 50,000, IX. Statutory and Executive Order
employees are captured under the rule. the cost-to-revenue ratio is 0.3 percent. Reviews
138 Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy E. What are the benefits of the proposed A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Solutions, Duke University. 2008. Size Thresholds rule for society? Planning and Review
for Greenhouse Gas Regulation: Who Would be
Affected by a 10,000-ton CO2 Emissions Rule?
EPA examined the potential benefits Under section 3(f)(1) of EO 12866 (58
Available at: http://www.nicholas.duke.edu/ of the GHG reporting rule. Because the FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action
institute/10Kton.pdf. benefits of a reporting system are based is an ‘‘economically significant
regulatory action’’ because it is likely to respondents that must comply with the by May 11, 2009. The final rule will
have an annual effect on the economy proposed rule’s reporting requirements, respond to any OMB or public
of $100 million or more. Accordingly, except for electricity generating units comments on the information collection
EPA submitted this action to the OMB that are already required to report requirements contained in this proposal.
for review under EO 12866 and any quarterly under 40 CFR part 75 (EPA
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
changes made in response to OMB Acid Rain Program); and the estimated
recommendations have been average number of likely respondents The RFA generally requires an agency
documented in the docket for this per year is 18,775. The cost burden to to prepare a regulatory flexibility
action. respondents resulting from the analysis of any rule subject to notice
In addition, EPA prepared an analysis collection of information includes the and comment rulemaking requirements
of the potential costs and benefits total capital cost annualized over the under the Administrative Procedure Act
associated with this action. A copy of equipment’s expected useful life or any other statute unless the agency
the analysis is available in Docket No. (averaging $20.7 million), a total certifies that the rule will not have a
EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–002 and is operation and maintenance component significant economic impact on a
briefly summarized in Section VIII of (averaging $22.4 million per year), and substantial number of small entities.
this preamble. a labor cost component (averaging Small entities include small businesses,
$100.0 million per year). Burden is small organizations, and small
B. Paperwork Reduction Act governmental jurisdictions.
defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). These cost
The information collection numbers differ from those shown For purposes of assessing the impacts
requirements in this proposed rule have elsewhere in the RIA for several reasons: of today’s rule on small entities, small
been submitted for approval to the OMB • ICR costs represent the average cost entity is defined as: (1) A small business
under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 over the first three years of the rule, but as defined by the Small Business
U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The ICR document costs are reported elsewhere in the RIA Administration’s regulations at 13 CFR
prepared by EPA has been assigned EPA for the first year of the rule and for 121.201; (2) a small governmental
ICR number 2300.01. subsequent years of the rule; jurisdiction that is a government of a
EPA plans to collect complete and • The costs of reporting electricity city, county, town, school district or
accurate economy-wide data on facility- purchases have been excluded from the special district with a population of less
level greenhouse gas emissions. ICR, but are still reported in the RIA, than 50,000; and (3) a small
Accurate and timely information on although electricity use reporting has organization that is any not-for-profit
greenhouse gas emissions is essential for been removed from the proposed rule enterprise which is independently
informing future climate change policy and EPA is soliciting comment on it (see owned and operated and is not
decisions. Through data collected under Section 4.2.2, pg 4–18); and dominant in its field.
this rule, EPA will gain a better • The first-year costs of coverage After considering the economic
understanding of the relative emissions determination, estimated to be $867.60 impacts of today’s proposed rule on
of specific industries, and the per facility for approximately 16,800 small entities, I certify that this action
distribution of emissions from facilities that ultimately determine they will not have a significant economic
individual facilities within those do not have to report, are included in impact on a substantial number of small
industries. The facility-specific data will the ICR but not in the RIA (see Section entities. The small entities directly
also improve our understanding of the 4.2.2, pg 4–18). These costs, averaged regulated by this proposed rule include
factors that influence greenhouse gas over 3 years, are $4.87 million incurred small businesses across all sectors
emission rates and actions that facilities by an average of 5,613 respondents per encompassed by the rule, small
are already taking to reduce emissions. year. governmental jurisdictions and small
Additionally, EPA will be able to track An agency may not conduct or non-profits. We have determined that
the trend of emissions from industries sponsor, and a person is not required to some small businesses will be affected
and facilities within industries over respond to, a collection of information because their production processes emit
time, particularly in response to policies unless it displays a currently valid OMB GHGs that must be reported, or because
and potential regulations. The data control number. The OMB control they have stationary combustion units
collected by this rule will improve numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40 onsite that emit GHGs that must be
EPA’s ability to formulate climate CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. To reported. Small governments and small
change policy options and to assess comment on the Agency’s need for this non-profits are generally affected
which industries would be affected, and information, the accuracy of the because they have regulated landfills or
how these industries would be affected provided burden estimates, and any stationary combustion units onsite, or
by the options. suggested methods for minimizing because they own a LDC.
This information collection is respondent burden, EPA has established For affected small entities, EPA
mandatory and will be carried out under a public docket for this rule. Submit any conducted a screening assessment
CAA sections 114 and 208. Information comments related to the ICR to EPA and comparing compliance costs for affected
identified and marked as CBI will not be OMB. See ADDRESSES section at the industry sectors to industry-specific
disclosed except in accordance with beginning of this notice for where to data on revenues for small businesses.
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. submit comments to EPA. Send This ratio constitutes a ‘‘sales’’ test that
However, emissions information comments to OMB at the Office of computes the annualized compliance
collected under CAA sections 114 and Information and Regulatory Affairs, costs of this proposed rule as a
208 cannot be claimed as CBI and will Office of Management and Budget, 725 percentage of sales and determines
be made public. 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC whether the ratio exceeds some level
The projected cost and hour burden 20503, Attention: Desk Office for EPA. (e.g., 1 percent or 3 percent). The cost-
for non-federal respondents is $143 Since OMB is required to make a to-sales ratios were constructed at the
million and 1.63 million hours per year. decision concerning the ICR between 30 establishment level (average compliance
The estimated average burden per and 60 days after April 10, 2009, a cost for the establishment/average
response is 2 hours; the proposed comment to OMB is best assured of establishment revenues). As shown in
frequency of response is annual for all having its full effect if OMB receives it Table VIII–5 of this preamble, the cost-
to-sales ratios are less than 1 percent for comments on issues related to such 055 for a complete list of organizations
establishments owned by small impacts. and groups that EPA contacted.
businesses that EPA considers most Consistent with section 205 of the
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act UMRA, EPA has identified and
likely to be covered by the reporting
(UMRA) considered a reasonable number of
program.139
The screening analysis thus indicates Title II of the UMRA of 1995 (UMRA), regulatory alternatives. EPA carefully
that the proposed rule will not have a 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, requires Federal examined regulatory alternatives, and
significant economic impact on a agencies, unless otherwise prohibited by selected the lowest cost/least
substantial number of small entities. See law, to assess the effects of their burdensome alternative that EPA deems
Table VIII–4 of this preamble for sector- regulatory actions on State, local, and adequate to address Congressional
specific results. The screening Tribal governments and the private concerns and to provide a consistent,
assessment for small governments sector. comprehensive source of information
compared the sum of average costs of EPA has developed this regulation about emissions of GHGs. EPA has
compliance for combustion, local under authority of CAA sections 114 considered the costs and benefits of the
distribution companies, and landfills to and 208. The required activities under proposed GHG reporting rule, and has
average revenues for small governments. this Federal mandate include concluded that the costs will fall mainly
Even for a small government owning all monitoring, recordkeeping, and on the private sector (approximately
three source types, the costs constitute reporting of GHG emissions from $131 million), with some costs incurred
less than 1 percent of average revenues multiple source categories (e.g., by State, local, and Tribal governments
for the smallest category of governments combustion, process, biologic and that must report their emissions (less
(those with fewer than 10,000 people). fugitive). This rule contains a Federal than $12.4 million) that own and
mandate that may result in expenditures operate stationary combustion units,
Although this proposed rule will not
of $100 million for the private sector in landfills, or natural gas local
have a significant economic impact on
any one year. As described below, we distribution companies (LDCs). EPA
a substantial number of small entities,
have determined that the expenditures estimates that an additional 1,979
EPA nonetheless took several steps to
for State, local, and Tribal governments, facilities owned by state, local, or tribal
reduce the impact of this rule on small
in the aggregate, will be approximately governments will incur approximately
entities. For example, EPA determined
$14.1 million per year, based on average $1.7 million in costs during the first
appropriate thresholds that reduce the
costs over the first three years of the year of the rule to make a reporting
number of small businesses reporting. In
rule. Accordingly, EPA has prepared determination and subsequently
addition, EPA is not requiring facilities
under section 202 of the UMRA a determine that their emissions are
to install CEMS if they do not already written statement which is summarized
have them. Facilities without CEMS can below the threshold and thus, they are
below. not required to report their emissions.
calculate emissions using readily Consistent with the intergovernmental
available data or data that are less Furthermore, we think it is unlikely that
consultation provisions of section 204 of State, local and Tribal governments
expensive to collect such as process the UMRA, EPA initiated an outreach
data or material consumption data. For would begin operating large industrial
effort with the governmental entities facilities, similar to those affected by
some source categories, EPA developed affected by this rule including State,
tiered methods that are simpler and less this rulemaking operated by the private
local, and Tribal officials. EPA sector.
burdensome. Also, EPA is requiring maintained an ‘‘open door’’ policy for Initially, EPA estimates that costs of
annual instead of more frequent stakeholders to provide input on key complying with the proposed rule will
reporting. issues and to help inform EPA’s be widely dispersed throughout many
Through comprehensive outreach understanding of issues, including sectors of the economy. Although EPA
activities, EPA held approximately 100 impacts to State, local and Tribal acknowledges that over time changes in
meetings and/or conference calls with governments. The outreach audience the patterns of economic activity may
representatives of the primary audience included State environmental protection mean that GHG generation and thus
groups, including numerous trade agencies, regional and Tribal air reporting costs will change, data are
associations and industries that include pollution control agencies, and other inadequate for projecting these changes.
small business members. EPA’s State and local government Thus, EPA assumes that costs averaged
outreach activities are documented in organizations. EPA contacted several over the first three years of the program
the memorandum, ‘‘Summary of EPA States and State and regional are typical of ongoing costs of
Outreach Activities for Developing the organizations already involved in compliance. EPA estimates that future
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule,’’ greenhouse gas emissions reporting. compliance costs will total
located in Docket No. EPA–HQ–OAR– EPA also conducted several conference approximately $145 million per year.
2008–0508–055. EPA maintains an calls with Tribal organizations. For EPA examined the distribution of these
‘‘open door’’ policy for stakeholders to example, EPA staff provided costs between private owners and State,
provide input on key issues and to help information to tribes through conference local, and Tribal governments owning
inform EPA’s understanding of issues, calls with multiple Tribal working GHG emitters. In addition, EPA
including thresholds for reporting and groups and organizations at EPA and examined, within the private sector, the
greenhouse gas calculation and through individual calls with two Tribal impacts on various industries. In
reporting methodologies. board members of TRI. In addition, EPA general, estimated cost per entity
EPA continues to be interested in the held meeting and conference calls with represents less than 0.1% of company
potential impacts of the proposed rule groups such as TRI, NACAA, ECOS, and sales in affected industries. These costs
on small entities and welcomes with State members of RGGI, the are broadly distributed to a variety of
Midwestern GHG Reduction Accord, economic sectors and represent
139 U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA).
and WCI. See the ‘‘Summary of EPA approximately 0.001 percent of 2007
2008. Firm Size Data from the Statistics of U.S.
Businesses: U.S. Detail Employment Sizes: 2002.
Outreach Activities for Developing the Gross Domestic Product; overall, EPA
http://www.census.gov/csd/susb/ Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule,’’ in does not believe the proposed rule will
download_susb02.htm. Docket No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508– have a significant macroeconomic
impact on the national economy. This regulation applies directly to Tribal Caucus. See the ‘‘Summary of
Therefore, this rule is not subject to the facilities that supply fuel or chemicals EPA Outreach Activities for Developing
requirements of section 203 of UMRA that when used emit greenhouse gases the GHG reporting rule,’’ in Docket No.
because it contains no regulatory or facilities that directly emit EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508–055 for a
requirements that might significantly or greenhouses gases. It does not apply to complete list of Tribal contacts.
uniquely affect small governments. governmental entities unless the EPA specifically solicits additional
EPA does not anticipate that government entity owns a facility that comment on this proposed rule from
substantial numbers of either public or directly emits greenhouse gases above Tribal officials.
private sector entities will incur threshold levels such as a landfill or G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
significant economic impacts as a result large stationary combustion source, so Children From Environmental Health
of this proposed rulemaking. EPA relatively few government facilities
Risks and Safety Risks
further expects that benefits of the would be affected. This regulation also
proposed rule will include more and does not limit the power of States or EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR
better information for EPA and the localities to collect GHG data and/or 19885, April 23, 1997) as applying only
private sector about emissions of GHGs. regulate GHG emissions. Thus, EO to those regulatory actions that concern
This improved information would 13132 does not apply to this rule. health or safety risks, such that the
enhance EPA’s ability to develop sound In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, analysis required under section 5–501 of
future climate policies, and may and consistent with EPA policy to the EO has the potential to influence the
encourage GHG emitters to develop promote communications between EPA regulation. This action is not subject to
voluntary plans to reduce their and State and local governments, EPA EO 13045 because it does not establish
emissions. specifically solicits comments on this an environmental standard intended to
This regulation applies directly to proposed rule from State and local mitigate health or safety risks.
facilities that supply fuel or chemicals officials. H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
that when used emit greenhouse gases,
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
and to facilities that directly emit
and Coordination With Indian Tribal Distribution, or Use
greenhouses gases. It does not apply to
governmental entities unless the Governments This proposed rule is not a
government entity owns a facility that This proposed rule is not expected to ‘‘significant energy action’’ as defined in
directly emits greenhouse gases above have Tribal implications, as specified in EO 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001)
threshold levels such as a landfill or EO 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, because it is not likely to have a
large stationary combustion source. In 2000). This regulation applies directly significant adverse effect on the supply,
addition, this rule does not impose any to facilities that supply fuel or distribution, or use of energy. Further,
implementation responsibilities on chemicals that when used emit we have concluded that this rule is not
State, local or Tribal governments and it greenhouse gases or facilities that likely to have any adverse energy
is not expected to increase the cost of directly emit greenhouses gases. effects. This proposal relates to
existing regulatory programs managed Facilities expected to be affected by the monitoring, reporting and
by those governments. Thus, the impact proposed rule are not expected to be recordkeeping at facilities that supply
on governments affected by the rule is owned by Tribal governments. Thus, fuel or chemicals that when used emit
expected to be minimal. Executive Order 13175 does not apply greenhouse gases or facilities that
to this proposed rule. directly emit greenhouses gases and
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism Although EO 13175 does not apply to does not impact energy supply,
EO 13132, entitled ‘‘Federalism’’ (64 this proposed rule, EPA sought distribution or use. Therefore, we
FR 43255, August 10, 1999), requires opportunities to provide information to conclude that this rule is not likely to
EPA to develop an accountable process Tribal governments and representatives have any adverse effects on energy
to ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input during development of the rule. In supply, distribution, or use.
by State and local officials in the consultation with EPA’s American
development of regulatory policies that Indian Environment Office, EPA’s I. National Technology Transfer and
have Federalism implications.’’ outreach plan included tribes. EPA Advancement Act
‘‘Policies that have Federalism conducted several conference calls with Section 12(d) of the National
implications’’ is defined in the EO to Tribal organizations. For example, EPA Technology Transfer and Advancement
include regulations that have staff provided information to tribes Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104–
‘‘substantial direct effects on the States, through conference calls with multiple 113 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to
on the relationship between the national Indian working groups and use voluntary consensus standards in its
government and the States, or on the organizations at EPA that interact with regulatory activities unless to do so
distribution of power and tribes and through individual calls with would be inconsistent with applicable
responsibilities among the various two Tribal board members of TCR. In law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary
levels of government.’’ addition, EPA prepared a short article consensus standards are technical
This proposed rule does not have on the GHG reporting rule that appeared standards (e.g., materials specifications,
Federalism implications. It will not on the front page a Tribal newsletter— test methods, sampling procedures, and
have substantial direct effects on the Tribal Air News—that was distributed business practices) that are developed or
States, on the relationship between the to EPA/OAQPS’s network of Tribal adopted by voluntary consensus
national government and the States, or organizations. EPA gave a presentation standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA
on the distribution of power and on various climate efforts, including the to provide Congress, through OMB,
responsibilities among the various mandatory reporting rule, at the explanations when the Agency decides
levels of government, as specified in EO National Tribal Conference on not to use available and applicable
13132. However, for a more detailed Environmental Management on June voluntary consensus standards.
discussion about how this proposal 24–26, 2008. In addition, EPA had This proposed rulemaking involves
relates to existing State programs, please copies of a short information sheet technical standards. EPA proposes to
see Section II of this preamble. distributed at a meeting of the National use more than 40 voluntary consensus
standards from six different voluntary environment because it is a rule Air pollution control, Confidential
consensus standards bodies: ASTM, addressing information collection and business information, Imports,
ASME, ISO, Gas Processors Association, reporting procedures. Incorporation by reference, Labeling,
American Gas Association, and Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping
List of Subjects
American Petroleum Institute. These requirements, Warranties.
voluntary consensus standards will help 40 CFR Part 86
facilities monitor, report, and keep 40 CFR Part 1042
Environmental protection,
records of greenhouse gas emissions. No Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
new test methods were developed for Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Reporting and
this proposed rule. Instead, from Air pollution control, Confidential
recordkeeping requirements, Motor
existing rules for source categories and vehicle pollution.
business information, Imports,
voluntary greenhouse gas programs, Incorporation by reference, Labeling,
EPA identified existing means of 40 CFR Part 87 Penalties, Vessels, Reporting and
monitoring, reporting, and keeping Environmental protection, Air recordkeeping requirements,
records of greenhouse gas emissions. pollution control, Aircraft, Warranties.
The existing methods (voluntary Incorporation by reference.
consensus standards) include a broad 40 CFR Parts 1045, 1048, 1051, and
range of measurement techniques, 40 CFR Part 89 1054
including many for combustion sources Environmental protection, Environmental protection,
such as methods to analyze fuel and Administrative practice and procedure, Administrative practice and procedure,
measure its heating value; methods to Confidential business information, Air pollution control, Confidential
measure gas or liquid flow; and methods Imports, Labeling, Motor vehicle business information, Imports,
to gauge and measure petroleum and pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping Incorporation by reference, Labeling,
petroleum products. The test methods requirements, Research, Vessels, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping
are incorporated by reference into the Warranty. requirements, Warranties.
proposed rule and are available as
specified in proposed 40 CFR 98.7. 40 CFR Part 90 40 CFR Part 1065
By incorporating voluntary consensus Environmental protection, Environmental protection,
standards into this proposed rule, EPA Administrative practice and procedure, Administrative practice and procedure,
is both meeting the requirements of the Confidential business information, Incorporation by reference, Reporting
NTTAA and presenting multiple Imports, Labeling, Reporting and and recordkeeping requirements,
options and flexibility for measuring recordkeeping requirements, Research, Research.
greenhouse gas emissions. Warranty. Dated: March 10, 2009.
EPA welcomes comments on this
40 CFR Part 94 Lisa P. Jackson,
aspect of the proposed rulemaking and,
specifically, invites the public to Administrator.
identify potentially-applicable For the reasons stated in the
Administrative practice and procedure,
voluntary consensus standards and to preamble, title 40, chapter I, of the Code
Air pollution control, Confidential
explain why such standards should be of Federal Regulations is proposed to be
business information, Imports,
used in this regulation. amended as follows:
Incorporation by reference, Labeling,
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Penalties, Vessels, Reporting and PART 86—[AMENDED]
Actions To Address Environmental recordkeeping requirements,
Justice in Minority Populations and Warranties. 1. The authority citation for part 86
Low-Income Populations continues to read as follows:
40 CFR Part 98
EO 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.
1994) establishes Federal executive Administrative practice and procedure, Subpart A—[Amended]
policy on environmental justice. Its Greenhouse gases, Incorporation by
main provision directs Federal agencies, reference, Suppliers, Reporting and 2. Section 86.007–23 is amended by
to the greatest extent practicable and recordkeeping requirements. adding paragraph (n) to read as follows:
permitted by law, to make
environmental justice part of their 40 CFR Part 600 § 86.007–23 Required data.
mission by identifying and addressing, Administrative practice and * * * * *
as appropriate, disproportionately high procedure, Electric power, Fuel (n) Starting in the 2011 model year for
and adverse human health or economy, Incorporation by reference, heavy-duty engines, measure CO2, N2O,
environmental effects of their programs, Labeling, Reporting and recordkeeping and CH4 with each low-hour
policies, and activities on minority requirements. certification test using the procedures
populations and low-income specified in 40 CFR part 1065. Report
populations in the U.S. 40 CFR Part 1033 these values in your application for
EPA has determined that this Environmental protection, certification. These measurements are
proposed rule will not have Administrative practice and procedure, not required for NTE testing. Use the
disproportionately high and adverse Confidential business information, same units and calculations as for your
human health or environmental effects Incorporation by reference, Labeling, other results to report a single weighted
on minority or low-income populations Penalties, Railroads, Reporting and value for CO2, N2O, and CH4 for each
because it does not affect the level of recordkeeping requirements. test. Round the final values as follows:
protection provided to human health or (1) Round CO2 to the nearest 1 g/kW-
the environment. This proposed rule 40 CFR Part 1039 hr.
does not affect the level of protection Environmental protection, (2) Round N2O to the nearest 0.001 g/
provided to human health or the Administrative practice and procedure, kW-hr.
(3) Round CH4 to the nearest 0.001g/ (3) Immediately after the in alphanumeric order to read as
kW-hr. preconditioning described in paragraph follows:
3. Section 86.078–3 is amended by (c)(1) of this section, turn off any
removing the paragraph (a) designation cooling fans, if present, close the § 86.403–78 Abbreviations.
and adding the abbreviations CH4 and vehicle’s hood, fully close all the * * * * *
N2O in alphanumeric order to read as vehicle’s windows, ensure that all the
follows: vehicle’s climate control systems are set * * * * *
to full off, start the CO2 sampling CH4 methane.
§ 86.078–3 Abbreviations.
system, and then idle the vehicle for not * * * * *
* * * * * less than 1 minute and not more than 5 N2O nitrous oxide.
minutes to achieve normal and stable * * * * *
* * * * * idle operation.
CH4 methane. 6. Section 86.431–78 is amended by
(4) Measure and record the adding paragraph (e) to read as follows:
* * * * * continuous CO2 concentration for 10.0
N2O nitrous oxide. minutes. Measure the CO2 concentration § 86.431–78 Data submission.
* * * * * continuously using raw or dilute * * * * *
sampling procedures. Multiply this (e) Starting in the 2011 model year,
Subpart B—[Amended] concentration by the continuous (raw or measure CO2, N2O, and CH4 with each
4. A new § 86.165–11 is added to read dilute) flow rate at the emission zero kilometer certification test (if one is
as follows: sampling location to determine the CO2 conducted) and with each test
flow rate. Calculate the constituent’s conducted at the applicable minimum
§ 86.165–11 Air Conditioning Idle Test cumulative flow rate continuously over test distance as defined in § 86.427–78.
Procedure. the test interval. This cumulative value Use the procedures specified in 40 CFR
(a) Applicability. This section is the total mass of the emitted part 1065 as needed to measure N2O,
describes procedures for determining air constituent. and CH4. Report these values in your
conditioning-related CO2 emissions (5) Within 60 seconds after
application for certification. Small-
from 2012 and later model year light- completing the measurement described
volume manufacturers (as defined in
duty vehicles, light-duty trucks, and in paragraph (c)(4) of this section, turn
§ 86.410–2006(e)) may omit this
medium-duty passenger vehicles. on the vehicle’s air conditioning system.
requirement. Use the same measurement
(b) Overview. The test consists of a Set automatic systems to a temperature
methods as for your other results to
brief period to stabilize the vehicle at 9 °F (5 °C) below the ambient
report a single value for CO2, N2O, and
idle, followed by a ten-minute period of temperature of the test cell. Set manual
CH4. Round the final values as follows:
idle when CO2 emissions are measured systems to maximum cooling with
(1) Round CO2 to the nearest 1 g/km.
without any climate control systems recirculation turned off. Continue idling
(2) Round N2O to the nearest 0.001 g/
operating; the test concludes with a ten- the vehicle while measuring and
km.
minute period when CO2 emissions are recording the continuous CO2
(3) Round CH4 to the nearest 0.001g/
measured with the air conditioning concentration for 10.0 minutes as
km.
system operating. This test is designed described in paragraph (c)(4) of this
to determine the air conditioning- section. Subpart S—[Amended]
related CO2 emission value, in grams (d) Calculations. (1) For the
per minute per cubic foot of interior measurement with no air conditioning, 7. Section 86.1804–01 is amended by
volume. If engine stalling occurs during calculate the CO2 emissions (in grams adding the abbreviations CH4 and N2O
cycle operation, follow the provisions of per minute) by dividing the total mass in alphanumeric order to read as
§ 86.136–90 to restart the test. of CO2 from paragraph (c)(4) of this follows:
Measurement instruments must meet section by 10.0.
(2) For the measurement with air § 86.1804–01 Acronyms and abbreviations.
the specifications described in 40 CFR
part 1065, subparts C and D. conditioning in operation, calculate the * * * * *
(c) Test sequence. Before testing, CO2 emissions (in grams per minute) by
precondition the vehicle as described in dividing the total mass of CO2 from * * * * *
§ 86.132, then allow the vehicle to idle paragraph (c)(5) of this section by 10.0. CH4 methane.
for not less than 1 minute and not more (3) Calculate the increased CO2 * * * * *
than 5 minutes. emissions due to air conditioning (in N2O nitrous oxide.
(1) Connect the vehicle exhaust grams per minute) by subtracting the * * * * *
system to the raw sampling location or results of paragraph (d)(1) of this section 8. Section 86.1843–01 is amended by
dilution stage according to 40 CFR from the results of paragraph (d)(2) of adding paragraph (i) to read as follows:
1065.130. For dilution systems, dilute this section.
the exhaust as described in 40 CFR (4) Divide the value from paragraph § 86.1843–01 General information
1065.140. Continuous sampling systems (d)(3) of this section by the interior requirements.
must meet the specifications of 40 CFR volume of the vehicle to determine the * * * * *
1065.145. increase in CO2 emissions in grams per (i) Air conditioning leakage reporting.
(2) Test the vehicle in a fully warmed- minute per cubic foot. Starting in the 2011 model year, the
up condition. If the vehicle has soaked (e) Reporting. Include the value manufacturer shall calculate and report
for two hours or less since the last calculated in paragraph (d)(4) of this a value for the annual leakage of
exhaust test element, preconditioning section in your application for refrigerant emissions from the air
may consist of a 505, 866, highway, certification. conditioning system for each model
US06, or SC03 test cycle. For longer type as described in 40 CFR 1064.201.
Subpart E—[Amended]
soak periods, precondition the vehicle The manufacturer shall also report the
using one full Urban Dynamometer 5. Section 86.403–78 is amended by type of refrigerant and the refrigerant
Driving Schedule. adding the abbreviations CH4 and N2O capacity for each air conditioning
system for each model type. The certification. Use the same measurement § 89.3 Acronyms and abbreviations.
manufacturer shall calculate and report methods as for your other results to * * * * *
these items for each combination of report a single value for CO2, N2O, and
vehicle model type (as defined in 40 CH4 for each test. Round the final values * * * * *
CFR 600.002) and air conditioning as follows: CH4 methane.
system produced. However, calculation (1) Round CO2 to the nearest 1 g/mi. * * * * *
and reporting of these items for multiple (2) Round N2O to the nearest 0.001 g/
air conditioning systems for a given N2O nitrous oxide.
mi.
model type is not necessary if air * * * * *
(3) Round CH4 to the nearest 0.001g/
conditioning systems are identical with
mi. Subpart B—[Amended]
respect to the characteristics identified
in paragraphs (i)(1) through (8) of this PART 87—[AMENDED]
section and they meet the quantitative 15. Section 89.115 is amended by
criteria identified in paragraph (i)(9) of revising paragraph (d)(9) to read as
10. The authority citation for part 87
this section. Consider all the following follows:
is revised to read as follows:
criteria to determine whether to Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. § 89.115 Application for certificate.
calculate separate leakage rates for * * * * *
different air conditioning systems. Subpart A—[Amended]
(1) Compressor type (e.g., belt driven (d) * * *
or electric). 11. Section 87.2 is amended by (9) All test data obtained by the
(2) Number and type of rigid pipes adding the abbreviations CH4 and CO2 manufacturer on each test engine,
and method of connecting sections of in alphanumeric order to read as including CO2, N2O, and CH4 as
rigid pipes. follows: specified in § 89.407(d)(1);
(3) Number and type of flexible hose * * * * *
§ 87.2 Acronyms and abbreviations.
and method of connecting sections of
flexible hose. Consider two hoses to be * * * * * Subpart E—[Amended]
of a different type if they use different CH4 methane.
materials or if they have a different * * * * * 16. Section 89.407 is amended by
configuration of layers for reducing revising paragraph (d)(1) to read as
CO2 carbon dioxide. follows:
permeation.
* * * * *
(4) Number of high-side service ports. § 89.407 Engine dynamometer test run.
(5) Number of low-side service ports. 12. Section 87.64 is revised to read as
(6) Number and type of switches, follows: * * * * *
transducers, and expansion valves. (d) * * *
§ 87.64 Sampling and analytical
(7) Number and type of refrigerant procedures for measuring gaseous exhaust (1) Measure HC, CO, CO2, and NOX
control devices. emissions. concentrations in the exhaust sample.
(8) Number and type of heat Starting in the 2011 model year, also
exchangers, mufflers, receiver/driers, (a) The system and procedures for
measure N2O, and CH4 with each low-
and accumulators. sampling and measurement of gaseous
hour certification test using the
(9) The following quantitative criteria emissions shall be as specified by
procedures specified in 40 CFR part
(based on nominal values) define Appendices 3 and 5 to ICAO Annex 16
1065. Small-volume engine
operating characteristics for including (incorporated by reference in § 87.8).
manufacturers (as defined in 40 CFR
air conditioning systems together: (b) Starting in the 2011 model year, 1039.801) may omit N2O, and CH4
(i) Refrigerant mass (rated capacity) of measure CH4 with each certification measurements. Use the same units and
larger system divided by refrigerant test. Use good engineering judgment to modal calculations as for your other
mass of smaller system at or below 1.1. determine CH4 emissions using a results to report a single weighted value
(ii) Total length of rigid pipe in the nonmethane cutter or gas for CO2, N2O, and CH4. Round the final
longer system divided by total length of chromatograph as described in 40 CFR values as follows:
rigid pipe in the shorter system at or 1065.265 and 1065.267. Report CH4 and
CO2 values along with your emission (i) Round CO2 to the nearest 1 g/kW-
below 1.1. hr.
(iii) Total length of flexible hose in levels of regulated pollutants. Round the
the longer system divided by total final values as follows: (ii) Round N2O to the nearest 0.001 g/
length of flexible hose in the shorter (1) Round CO2 to the nearest 1 g/ kW-hr.
system at or below 1.1. kilonewton rO. (iii) Round CH4 to the nearest 0.001g/
9. Section 86.1844–01 is amended by (2) Round CH4 to the nearest 0.01g/g/ kW-hr.
adding paragraph (j) to read as follows: kilonewton rO. * * * * *
§ 86.1844–01 Information requirements: PART 89—[AMENDED] PART 90—[AMENDED]
Application for certification and submittal of
information upon request. 13. The authority citation for part 89 17. The authority citation for part 90
* * * * * continues to read as follows: continues to read as follows:
(j) Starting in the 2011 model year, Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.
measure CO2, N2O, and CH4 with each
certification test on an emission data Subpart A—[Amended] Subpart A—[Amended]
vehicle. Do not apply deterioration
factors to the results. Use the procedures 14. Section 89.3 is amended by 18. Section 90.5 is amended by
specified in 40 CFR part 1065 as needed adding the abbreviations CH4 and N2O adding the abbreviations CH4 and N2O
to measure N2O, and CH4. Report these in alphanumeric order to read as in alphanumeric order to read as
values in your application for follows: follows:
§ 90.5 Acronyms and abbreviations. CH4 methane. Subpart B [Reserved]

* * * * * * * * * * Subpart C—General Stationary Fuel
N2O nitrous oxide. Combustion Sources
* * * * * 98.30 Definition of the source category.
CH4 methane. * * * * *
98.31 Reporting threshold.
* * * * * Subpart B—[Amended] 98.32 GHGs to report.
N2O nitrous oxide. 98.33 Calculating GHG emissions.
* * * * * 98.34 Monitoring and QA/QC
22. Section 94.104 is amended by requirements.
adding paragraph (e) to read as follows: 98.35 Procedures for estimating missing
Subpart B—[Amended]
data.
§ 94.104 Test procedures for Category 2 98.36 Data reporting requirements.
19. Section 90.107 is amended by marine engines.
revising paragraph (d)(8) to read as 98.37 Records that must be retained.
follows: * * * * * 98.38 Definitions.
Table C–1 of Subpart C—Default CO2
(e) Measure CO2 as described in 40
§ 90.107 Application for certification. Emission Factors and High Heat Values
CFR 92.129 through the 2010 model for Various Types of Fuel
* * * * * year. Starting in the 2011 model year, Table C–2 of Subpart C—Default CO2
(d) * * * measure CO2, N2O, and CH4 as specified Emission Factors for the Combustion of
(8) All test data obtained by the in 40 CFR 1042.235. Alternative Fuels
manufacturer on each test engine, Table C–3 of Subpart C—Default CH4 and
including CO2, N2O, and CH4 as § 94.109 [Amended] N2O Emission Factors for Various Types
specified in § 90.409(c)(1); 23. Section 94.109 is amended by of Fuel
* * * * * adding paragraph (d) to read as follows: Subpart D—Electricity Generation
98.40 Definition of the source category.
Subpart E—[Amended] Subpart C—[Amended] 98.41 Reporting threshold.
20. Section 90.409 is amended by 98.42 GHGs to report.
revising paragraph (c)(1) to read as 24. Section 94.203 is amended by 98.43 Calculating GHG emissions.
follows: revising paragraph (d)(10) to read as 98.44 Monitoring and QA/QC requirements
follows: 98.45 Procedures for estimating missing
§ 90.409 Engine dynamometer test run. data.
§ 94.203 Application for certification. 98.46 Data reporting requirements.
* * * * * 98.47 Records that must be retained.
(c) * * * * * * * *
98.48 Definitions.
(1) Measure HC, CO, CO2, and NOX (d) * * *
concentrations in the exhaust sample. Subpart E—Adipic Acid Production
(10) All test data obtained by the
Starting in the 2011 model year, also 98.50 Definition of source category.
manufacturer on each test engine, 98.51 Reporting threshold.
measure N2O, and CH4 with each low-
including CO2, N2O, and CH4 as 98.52 GHGs to report.
hour certification test using the
specified in 40 CFR 89.407(d)(1) for 98.53 Calculating GHG emissions.
procedures specified in 40 CFR part
Category 1 engines, § 94.104(e) for 98.54 Monitoring and QA/QC requirements
Category 2 engines, and § 94.109(d) for 98.55 Procedures for estimating missing
manufacturers may omit N2O, and CH4 data.
Category 3 engines. Small-volume
measurements. Use the same units and 98.56 Data reporting requirements.
manufacturers may omit the
modal calculations as for your other 98.57 Records that must be retained.
requirement to measure and report N2O,
results to report a single weighted value 98.58 Definitions.
and CH4.
for CO2, N2O, and CH4. Round the final Subpart F—Aluminum Production
values as follows: * * * * *
(i) Round CO2 to the nearest 1 g/kW- 98.60 Definition of the source category.
25. Add part 98 to read as follows:
hr.
98.62 GHGs to report.
(ii) Round N2O to the nearest 0.001 g/ PART 98—MANDATORY 98.63 Calculating GHG emissions.
kW-hr. GREENHOUSE GAS REPORTING 98.64 Monitoring and QA/QC
(iii) Round CH4 to the nearest 0.001g/ requirements.
kW-hr. Sec.
98.65 Procedures for estimating missing
* * * * * Subpart A—General Provisions data.
98.1 Purpose and scope. 98.66 Data reporting requirements.
PART 94—[AMENDED] 98.2 Do I need to report? 98.67 Records that must be retained.
98.68 Definitions.
21. The authority citation for part 94 98.3 What are the general monitoring,
reporting, recordkeeping and verification Subpart G—Ammonia Manufacturing
continues to read as follows:
requirements of this part? 98.70 Definition of source category.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. 98.4 Authorization and responsibilities of 98.71 Reporting threshold.
the designated representative. 98.72 GHGs to report.
Subpart A—[Amended] 98.5 How do I submit my report? 98.73 Calculating GHG emissions.
98.6 What definitions do I need to 98.74 Monitoring and QA/QC
22. Section 94.3 is amended by understand?
adding the abbreviations CH4 and N2O requirements.
98.7 What standardized methods are 98.75 Procedures for estimating missing
in alphanumeric order to read as incorporated by reference into this part? data.
follows: 98.8 What are the compliance and 98.76 Data reporting requirements.
enforcement provisions of this part? 98.77 Records that must be retained.
§ 94.3 Abbreviations.
Table A–1 of Subpart A—Global Warming 98.78 Definitions.
* * * * * Potentials (100-Year Time Horizon)
Table A–2 of Subpart A—Units of Measure Subpart H—Cement Production
* * * * * Conversions 98.80 Definition of the source category.
98.81 Reporting threshold. 98.142 GHGs to report. 98.197 Records that must be retained.
98.82 GHGs to report. 98.143 Calculating GHG emissions. 98.198 Definitions.
98.83 Calculating GHG emissions. 98.144 Monitoring and QA/QC Table S–1 of Subpart S—Basic Parameters for
98.84 Monitoring and QA/QC requirements. the Calculation of Emission Factors for
requirements. 98.145 Procedures for estimating missing Lime Production
98.85 Procedures for estimating missing data.
data. 98.146 Data reporting requirements. Subpart T—Magnesium Production
98.86 Data reporting requirements. 98.147 Records that must be retained. 98.200 Definition of source category.
98.87 Records that must be retained. 98.148 Definitions. 98.201 Reporting threshold.
98.88 Definitions. Table N–1 of Subpart N—CO2 Emission 98.202 GHGs to report.
Factors for Carbonate-Based Raw 98.203 Calculating GHG emissions.
Subpart I—Electronics Manufacturing Materials 98.204 Monitoring and QA/QC
98.90 Definition of the source category. requirements.
98.91 Reporting threshold. Subpart O—HCFC–22 Production and HFC– 98.205 Procedures for estimating missing
98.92 GHGs to report. 23 Destruction data.
98.93 Calculating GHG emissions. 98.150 Definition of the source category. 98.206 Data reporting requirements.
98.94 Monitoring and QA/QC 98.151 Reporting threshold. 98.207 Records that must be retained.
requirements. 98.152 GHGs to report. 98.208 Definitions.
98.95 Procedures for estimating missing 98.153 Calculating GHG emissions.
data. Subpart U—Miscellaneous Uses of
Table O–1 of Subpart O—Emission Factors
98.96 Data reporting requirements. for Equipment Leaks Carbonate
98.97 Records that must be retained. 98.154 Monitoring and QA/QC 98.210 Definition of the source category.
98.98 Definitions. requirements. 98.211 Reporting threshold.
Table I–1 of Subpart I—F–GHGs Typically 98.155 Procedures for estimating missing 98.212 GHGs to report.
Used by the Electronics Industry data. 98.213 Calculating GHG emissions.
Table I–2 of Subpart I—Default Emission 98.156 Data reporting requirements. 98.214 Monitoring and QA/QC
Factors for Semiconductor and MEMs 98.157 Records that must be retained. requirements.
Manufacturing 98.158 Definitions. 98.215 Procedures for estimating missing
Table I–3 of Subpart I—Default Emission data.
Factors for LCD Manufacturing Subpart P—Hydrogen Production 98.216 Data reporting requirements.
Table I–4 of Subpart I—Default Emission 98.160 Definition of the source category. 98.217 Records that must be retained.
Factors for PV Manufacturing 98.161 Reporting threshold. 98.218 Definitions.
98.162 GHGs to report. Table U–1 of Subpart U—CO2 Emission
Subpart J—Ethanol Production 98.163 Calculating GHG emissions. Factors for Common Carbonates
98.100 Definition of the source category. 98.164 Monitoring and QA/QC
98.101 Reporting threshold. requirements. Subpart V—Nitric Acid Production
98.102 GHGs to report. 98.165 Procedures for estimating missing 98.220 Definition of source category.
98.103 Definitions. data. 98.221 Reporting threshold.
98.166 Data reporting requirements. 98.222 GHGs to report.
Subpart K—Ferroalloy Production 98.167 Records that must be retained. 98.223 Calculating GHG emissions.
98.110 Definition of the source category. 98.168 Definitions. 98.224 Monitoring and QA/QC
98.111 Reporting threshold. requirements.
98.112 GHGs to report. Subpart Q—Iron and Steel Production 98.225 Procedures for estimating missing
98.113 Calculating GHG emissions. 98.170 Definition of the source category. data.
98.114 Monitoring and QA/QC 98.171 Reporting threshold. 98.226 Data reporting requirements.
requirements. 98.172 GHGs to report. 98.227 Records that must be retained.
98.115 Procedures for estimating missing 98.173 Calculating GHG emissions. 98.228 Definitions.
data. 98.174 Monitoring and QA/QC
98.116 Data reporting requirements. requirements. Subpart W—Oil and Natural Gas Systems
98.117 Records that must be retained. 98.175 Procedures for estimating missing 98.230 Definition of the source category.
98.118 Definitions. data. 98.231 Reporting threshold.
Table K–1 of Subpart K—Electric Arc 98.176 Data reporting requirements. 98.232 GHGs to report.
Furnace (EAF) CH4 Emission Factors 98.177 Records that must be retained. 98.233 Calculating GHG emissions.
98.178 Definitions. 98.234 Monitoring and QA/QC
Subpart L—Fluorinated Greenhouse Gas requirements.
Production Subpart R—Lead Production 98.235 Procedures for estimating missing
98.120 Definition of the source category. 98.180 Definition of the source category. data.
98.121 Reporting threshold. 98.181 Reporting threshold. 98.236 Data reporting requirements.
98.122 GHGs to report. 98.182 GHGs to report. 98.236 Records that must be retained.
98.123 Calculating GHG emissions. 98.184 Monitoring and QA/QC 98.237 Definitions.
98.124 Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.
requirements. 98.185 Procedures for estimating missing Subpart X—Petrochemical Production
98.125 Procedures for estimating missing data. 98.240 Definition of the source category.
data. 98.186 Data Reporting Procedures. 98.241 Reporting threshold.
98.126 Data reporting requirements. 98.187 Records that must be retained. 98.242 GHGs to report.
98.127 Records that must be retained. 98.188 Definitions. 98.243 Calculating GHG emissions.
98.128 Definitions. 98.244 Monitoring and QA/QC
Subpart S—Lime Manufacturing requirements.
Subpart M—Food Processing 98.190 Definition of the source category. 98.245 Procedures for estimating missing
98.130 Definition of the source category. 98.191 Reporting threshold. data.
98.131 Reporting threshold. 98.192 GHGs to report. 98.246 Data reporting requirements.
98.132 GHGs to report. 98.193 Calculating GHG emissions. 98.247 Records that must be retained.
98.133 Definitions. 98.194 Monitoring and QA/QC 98.248 Definitions.
requirements.
Subpart N—Glass Production 98.195 Procedures for estimating missing Subpart Y—Petroleum Refineries
98.140 Definition of the source category. data. 98.250 Definition of source category.
98.141 Reporting threshold. 98.196 Data reporting requirements. 98.251 Reporting threshold.
98.252 GHGs to report. 98.306 Data reporting requirements. 98.363 Calculating GHG emissions.
98.253 Calculating GHG emissions. 98.307 Records that must be retained. 98.364 Monitoring and QA/QC
98.254 Monitoring and QA/QC 98.308 Definitions. requirements.
requirements. 98.365 Procedures for estimating missing
98.255 Procedures for estimating missing Subpart EE—Titanium Dioxide Production
data.
data. 98.310 Definition of the source category. 98.366 Data reporting requirements.
98.256 Data reporting requirements. 98.311 Reporting threshold. 98.367 Records that must be retained.
98.257 Records that must be retained. 98.312 GHGs to report. 98.368 Definitions.
98.258 Definitions. 98.313 Calculating GHG emissions. Table JJ–1 of Subpart JJ—Waste
98.314 Monitoring and QA/QC Characteristics Data
Subpart Z—Phosphoric Acid Production requirements. Table JJ–2 of Subpart JJ—Methane
98.260 Definition of the source category. 98.315 Procedures for estimating missing Conversion Factors
98.261 Reporting threshold. data. Table JJ–3 of Subpart JJ—Collection
98.262 GHGs to report. 98.316 Data reporting requirements. Efficiencies of Anaerobic Digesters
98.263 Calculating GHG emissions. 98.317 Records that must be retained. Table JJ–4 of Subpart JJ—Nitrous Oxide
98.264 Monitoring and QA/QC 98.318 Definitions. Emission Factors (kg N2O-N/kg Kjdl N)
requirements.
98.265 Procedures for estimating missing Subpart FF—Underground Coal Mines
Subpart KK—Suppliers of Coal
data. 98.320 Definition of the source category.
98.266 Data reporting requirements. 98.321 Reporting threshold.
98.267 Records that must be retained. 98.322 GHGs to report.
98.268 Definitions. 98.323 Calculating GHG emissions.
98.373 Calculating GHG emissions.
98.324 Monitoring and QA/QC
Subpart AA—Pulp and Paper Manufacturing requirements. 98.374 Monitoring and QA/QC
98.270 Definition of source category. 98.325 Procedures for estimating missing requirements.
98.271 Reporting threshold. data. 98.375 Procedures for estimating missing
98.272 GHGs to report. 98.326 Data reporting requirements. data.
98.273 Calculating GHG emissions. 98.327 Records that must be retained. 98.376 Data reporting requirements.
98.274 Monitoring and QA/QC 98.328 Definitions. 98.377 Records that must be retained.
requirements. 98.378 Definitions.
98.275 Procedures for estimating missing Subpart GG—Zinc Production Table KK–1 of Subpart KK—Default Carbon
data. 98.330 Definition of the source category. Content of Coal for Method 3 (CO2 lbs/
98.276 Data reporting requirements. 98.331 Reporting threshold. MMBtu1)
98.277 Records that must be retained. 98.332 GHGs to report. Subpart LL—Suppliers of Coal-based Liquid
98.278 Definitions. 98.333 Calculating GHG emissions. Fuels
Table AA–1 of Subpart AA—Kraft Pulping 98.334 Monitoring and QA/QC
Liquor Emissions Factors for Biomass- requirements. 98.380 Definition of the source category.
Based CO2, CH4, and N2O 98.335 Procedures for estimating missing 98.381 Reporting threshold.
Table AA–2 of Subpart AA—Kraft Lime Kiln data. 98.382 GHGs to report.
and Calciner Emissions Factors for Fossil 98.336 Data reporting requirements. 98.383 Calculating GHG emissions.
Fuel-Based CO2, CH4, and N2O 98.337 Records that must be retained. 98.384 Monitoring and QA/QC
98.338 Definitions. requirements.
Subpart BB—Silicon Carbide Production 98.385 Procedures for estimating missing
98.280 Definition of the source category. Subpart HH—Landfills data.
98.281 Reporting threshold. 98.340 Definition of the source category. 98.386 Data reporting requirements.
98.283 Calculating GHG emissions. 98.341 Reporting threshold. 98.387 Records that must be retained.
98.284 Monitoring and QA/QC 98.343 Calculating GHG emissions. 98.388 Definitions.
requirements. 98.344 Monitoring and QA/QC
Subpart MM—Suppliers of Petroleum
98.285 Procedures for estimating missing requirements.
Products
data. 98.345 Procedures for estimating missing
98.286 Data reporting requirements. data. 98.390 Definition of the source category.
98.287 Records that must be retained. 98.346 Data reporting requirements. 98.391 Reporting threshold.
98.288 Definitions. 98.347 Records that must be retained. 98.392 GHGs to report.
98.348 Definitions. 98.393 Calculating GHG emissions.
Subpart CC—Soda Ash Manufacturing Table HH–1 of Subpart HH—Emissions 98.394 Monitoring and QA/QC
98.290 Definition of the source category. Factors, Oxidation Factors and Methods requirements.
98.291 Reporting threshold. Table HH–2 of Subpart HH—U.S. Per Capita 98.395 Procedures for estimating missing
98.292 GHGs to report. Waste Disposal Rates data.
98.293 Calculating GHG emissions. 98.396 Data reporting requirements.
98.294 Monitoring and QA/QC Subpart II—Wastewater Treatment 98.397 Records that must be retained.
requirements. 98.350 Definition of source category. 98.398 Definitions.
98.295 Procedures for estimating missing 98.351 Reporting threshold. Table MM–1 of Subpart MM—Default CO2
data. 98.352 GHGs to report. Factors for Petroleum Products 1,2
98.296 Data reporting requirements. 98.353 Calculating GHG emissions. Table MM–2 of Subpart MM—Default CO2
98.297 Records that must be retained. 98.354 Monitoring and QA/QC Factors for Natural Gas Liquids
98.298 Definitions. requirements. Table MM–3 of Subpart MM—Default CO2
98.355 Procedures for estimating missing Factors for Biomass Products and
Subpart DD—Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6)
data. Feedstock
From Electrical Equipment
98.356 Data reporting requirements.
98.300 Definition of the source category. Subpart NN—Suppliers of Natural Gas and
98.357 Records that must be retained.
98.301 Reporting threshold. Natural Gas Liquids
98.358 Definitions.
98.302 GHGs to report. Table II–1 of Subpart II—Emission Factors 98.400 Definition of the source category.
98.303 Calculating GHG emissions. 98.401 Reporting threshold.
98.304 Monitoring and QA/QC Subpart JJ—Manure Management 98.402 GHGs to report.
requirements. 98.360 Definition of the source category. 98.403 Calculating GHG emissions.
98.305 Procedures for estimating missing 98.361 Reporting threshold. 98.404 Monitoring and QA/QC
data. 98.362 GHGs to report. requirements.
98.405 Procedures for estimating missing in 2010. For these facilities, the GHG (iii) Ethanol production.
data. emission report must cover all sources (iv) Ferroalloy production.
98.406 Data reporting requirements. in any source category for which (v) Fluorinated greenhouse gas
98.407 Records that must be retained. production.
calculation methodologies are provided
98.408 Definitions.
Table NN–1 of Subpart NN—Default Factors in subparts B through JJ of this part. (vi) Food processing.
for Calculation Methodology 1 of This (i) Electricity generating facilities that (vii) Glass production.
Subpart are subject to the Acid Rain Program, or (viii) Hydrogen production.
Table NN–2 of Subpart NN—Lookup Default that contain electric generating units (ix) Iron and steel production.
Values for Calculation Methodology 2 of that collectively emit 25,000 metric tons (x) Lead production.
This Subpart CO2e or more per year. (xi) Magnesium production.
(ii) Adipic acid production. (xii) Oil and natural gas systems.
Subpart OO—Suppliers of Industrial
Greenhouse Gases (iii) Aluminum production. (xiii) Pulp and Paper Manufacturing.
(iv) Ammonia manufacturing. (xiv) Zinc production.
98.410 Definition of the source category. (v) Cement production. (xv) Industrial landfills.
(vi) Electronics—Semiconductor, (xvi) Wastewater treatment.
98.413 Calculating GHG emissions. microelectricomechanical system (3) Any facility that in any calendar
98.414 Monitoring and QA/QC (MEMS), and liquid crystal display year starting in 2010 meets all three of
requirements. (LCD) manufacturing facilities with an the conditions listed in this paragraph
98.415 Procedures for estimating missing annual production capacity that exceeds (a)(3). For these facilities, the GHG
data. any of the thresholds listed in this emission report must cover emissions
98.416 Data reporting requirements. paragraph. from stationary fuel combustion sources
98.417 Records that must be retained. (A) Semiconductors: 1,080 m2 silicon. only. For 2010 only, the facilities may
98.418 Definitions. (B) MEMS: 1,020 m2 silicon. submit an abbreviated emissions report
Subpart PP—Suppliers of Carbon Dioxide (C) LCD: 235,700 m2 LCD. according to § 98.3(d).
(vii) Electric power systems that (i) The facility does not contain any
include electrical equipment with a source category designated in
98.422 GHGs to report. total nameplate capacity that exceeds paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section.
98.423 Calculating GHG emissions. 17,820 lbs (7,838 kg) of SF6 or (ii) The aggregate maximum rated heat
98.424 Monitoring and QA/QC perfluorocarbons (PFCs). input capacity of the stationary fuel
requirements. (viii) HCFC–22 production. combustion units at the facility is 30
98.425 Procedures for estimating missing (ix) HFC–23 destruction processes mmBtu/hr or greater.
data. that are not collocated with a HCFC–22 (iii) The facility emits 25,000 metric
98.426 Data reporting requirements. production facility and that destroy
98.427 Records that must be retained.
tons CO2e or more per year from all
more than 2.14 metric tons of HFC–23 stationary fuel combustion sources.
98.428 Definitions. per year. (4) Any supplier of any of the
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq. (x) Lime manufacturing. products listed in this paragraph (a)(4)
(xi) Nitric acid production. in any calendar year starting in 2010.
Subpart A—General Provisions (xii) Petrochemical production.
(xiii) Petroleum refineries. For these suppliers, the GHG emissions
§ 98.1 Purpose and scope. (xiv) Phosphoric acid production. report must cover all applicable
(a) This part establishes mandatory (xv) Silicon carbide production. products for which calculation
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (xvi) Soda ash production. methodologies are provided in subparts
reporting requirements for certain (xvii) Titanium dioxide production. KK through PP of this part.
facilities that directly emit GHG as well (xviii) Underground coal mines that (i) Coal.
as for fossil fuel suppliers and industrial are subject to quarterly or more frequent (ii) Coal-based liquid fuels.
GHG suppliers. sampling by MSHA of ventilation (iii) Petroleum products.
(b) Owners and operators of facilities systems. (iv) Natural gas and natural gas
and suppliers that are subject to this (xix) Municipal landfills that generate liquids.
part must follow the requirements of CH4 in amounts equivalent to 25,000 (v) Industrial greenhouse gases, as
subpart A and all applicable subparts of metric tons CO2e or more per year. specified in either paragraph (a)(4)(v)(A)
this part. If a conflict exists between a (xx) Manure management systems that or (B) of this section:
provision in subpart A and any other emit CH4 and N2O in amounts (A) All producers of industrial
applicable subpart, the requirements of equivalent to 25,000 metric tons CO2e or greenhouse gases.
the subparts B through PP of this part more per year. (B) Importers of industrial greenhouse
shall take precedence. (2) Any facility that emits 25,000 gases with total bulk imports that
metric tons CO2e or more per year in exceed 25,000 metric tons CO2e per
§ 98.2 Do I need to report? combined emissions from stationary year.
(a) The GHG emissions reporting fuel combustion units, miscellaneous (C) Exporters of industrial greenhouse
requirements, and related monitoring, uses of carbonate, and all source gases with total bulk exports that exceed
recordkeeping, and verification categories that are listed in this 25,000 metric tons CO2e per year.
requirements, of this part apply to the paragraph (a)(2) and that are located at (vi) Carbon dioxide, as specified in
owners and operators of any facility that the facility in any calendar year starting either paragraph (a)(4)(vi)(A) or (B) of
meets the requirements of either in 2010. For these facilities, the GHG this section.
paragraph (a)(1), (a)(2), or (a)(3) of this emission report must cover all source (A) All producers of carbon dioxide.
section; and any supplier that meets the categories for which calculation (B) Importers of CO2 or a combination
requirements of paragraph (a)(4) of this methodologies are provided in subparts of CO2 and other industrial GHGs with
section: B through JJ of this part. total bulk imports that exceed 25,000
(1) A facility that contains any of the (i) Electricity generation. metric tons CO2e per year.
source categories listed in this (ii) Electronics—photovoltaic (C) Exporters of CO2 or a combination
paragraph in any calendar year starting manufacturing. of CO2 and other industrial GHGs with
total bulk exports that exceed 25,000 CH4, N2O emissions from all stationary material use, addition of equipment,
metric tons CO2e per year. combustion units using the methods and facility expansion.
(b) To calculate GHG emissions for specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this (g) Once a facility or supplier is
comparison to the 25,000 metric ton section. Then, convert the emissions of subject to the requirements of this part,
CO2e per year emission threshold in each GHG to metric tons CO2e per year the owners and operators of the facility
paragraph (a)(2) of this section, the using Equation A–1 of this section, and or supply operation must continue for
owner or operator shall calculate annual sum the emissions for all units at the each year thereafter to comply with all
CO2e emissions, as described in facility. requirements of this part, including the
paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this (d) To calculate GHG quantities for requirement to submit GHG emission
section. comparison to the 25,000 metric ton reports, even if the facility or supplier
(1) Estimate the annual emissions of CO2e per year threshold for importers does not meet the applicability
CO2, CH4, N2O, and fluorinated GHG (as and exporters of industrial greenhouse requirements in paragraph (a) of this
defined in § 98.6) in metric tons from gases under paragraph (a)(4) of this section in a future year. If a GHG
stationary fuel combustion units, section, the owner or operator shall emission source in a future year through
miscellaneous uses of carbonate, and calculate the total annual CO2e of all the change of ownership becomes part of a
any applicable source category listed in industrial GHGs that the company different facility that has not previously
paragraph § 98.2(a)(2). The GHG imported and the total annual CO2e of met, and does not in that future year
emissions shall be calculated using the all the industrial GHGs that the meet, the applicability requirements of
methodologies specified in each company exported during the reporting paragraph (a) of this section; the owner
applicable subpart. For this calculation, year, as described in paragraphs (d)(1) or operator shall comply with the
facilities with industrial landfills must through (d)(3) of this section. requirements of this part only with
use the CH4 generation calculation (1) Calculate the mass in metric tons regard to that source, including the
methodology in subpart HH of this part. per year of CO2, N2O, and each requirement to submit GHG emission
(2) For stationary combustion units, fluorinated GHG (as defined in § 98.6) reports.
calculate the annual CO2 emissions in imported and the mass in metric tons (h) Table A–2 of this subpart provides
metric tons using any appropriate per year of CO2, N2O, and fluorinated a conversion table for some of the
method specified in § 98.33(a). Calculate GHG exported during the year. The common units of measure used in part
the annual CH4 and N2O emissions from masses shall be calculated using the 98.
the stationary combustion sources in methodologies specified in subpart OO
metric tons using Equation C–9 in of this part. § 98.3 What are the general monitoring,
§ 98.33(c). Carbon dioxide emissions reporting, recordkeeping and verification
(2) Convert the mass of each GHG
from the combustion of biogenic fuels requirements of this part?
imported and each GHG exported from
shall be excluded from the calculations. paragraph (d)(1) of this section to metric The owner or operator of a facility or
In using Equations C–2a and C–9 in tons of CO2e using Equation A–1 of supplier that is subject to the
§ 98.33, the high heat value for all types § 98.3. requirements of this part must submit
of fuel shall be determined monthly. (3) Sum the total annual metric tons GHG emissions reports to the
(3) For miscellaneous uses of of CO2e in paragraph (d)(2) of this Administrator, as specified in
carbonate, calculate the annual CO2 section for all imported GHGs. Sum the paragraphs (a) through (g) of this
emissions in metric tons using the total annual metric tons of CO2e in section.
procedures specified in subpart U of paragraph (d)(2) of this section for all (a) General. You must collect
this part. exported GHGs. emissions data, calculate GHG
(4) Sum the emissions estimates from emissions, and follow the procedures
(e) If a capacity or generation
paragraphs (b)(1), (2), and (3) of this for quality assurance, missing data,
reporting threshold in paragraph (a)(1)
section for each GHG and calculate recordkeeping, and reporting that are
of this section applies, the owner or
metric tons of CO2e using Equation A– specified in each relevant subpart of this
operator shall review the appropriate
1. part.
records to determine whether the
n threshold has been exceeded. (b) Schedule. Unless otherwise
CO 2 e = ∑ GHG i x GWPi (Eq. A-1) (f) Except as provided in paragraph (g) specified in subparts B through PP, you
i =1 of this section, the owners and operators must submit an annual GHG emissions
of a facility or supplier that does not report no later than March 31 of each
Where:
meet the applicability requirements of calendar year for GHG emissions in the
CO2e = Carbon dioxide equivalent, metric
paragraph (a) of this section are not previous calendar year.
tons/year.
GHGi = Mass emissions of each greenhouse required to submit an emission report (1) For existing facilities that
gas emitted, metric tons/year. for the facility or supplier. Such owners commenced operation before January 1,
GWPi = Global warming potential for each and operators must reevaluate the 2010, you must report emissions for
greenhouse gas from Table A–1 of this applicability to this part to the facility calendar year 2010 and each subsequent
subpart. or supplier (which reevaluation must calendar year.
n = The number of greenhouse gases emitted. include the revising of any relevant (2) For new facilities that commence
(5) For purpose of determining if an emissions calculations or other operation on or after January 1, 2010,
emission threshold has been exceeded, calculations) whenever there is any you must report emissions for the first
capture of CO2 for transfer off site must change to the facility or supplier that calendar year in which the facility
not be considered. could cause the facility or supplier to operates, beginning with the first
(c) To calculate GHG emissions for meet the applicability requirements of operating month and ending on
comparison to the 25,000 metric ton paragraph (a) of this section. Such December 31 of that year. Each
CO2e/year emission threshold for changes include but are not limited to subsequent annual report must cover
stationary fuel combustion under process modifications, increases in emissions for the calendar year,
paragraph (a)(3) of this section, the operating hours, increases in beginning on January 1 and ending on
EP10AP09.000</GPH>
owner or operator shall calculate CO2, production, changes in fuel or raw December 31.
(3) For any facility or supplier that the facility for emissions in 2010. The records prescribed in each applicable
becomes subject to this rule because of abbreviated report must be submitted by subpart of this part:
a physical or operational change that is March 31, 2011. An owner or operator (1) A list of all units, operations,
made after January 1, 2010, you must that submits an abbreviated report for a processes, and activities for which GHG
report emissions for the first calendar facility in 2011 must submit a full GHG emission were calculated.
year in which the change occurs, emissions report according to the (2) The data used to calculate the
beginning with the first month of the requirements of paragraph (c) of this GHG emissions for each unit, operation,
change and ending on December 31 of section for each calendar year thereafter. process, and activity, categorized by fuel
that year. Each subsequent annual The abbreviated facility report must or material type. The results of all
report must cover emissions for the include the following information: required fuel analyses for high heat
calendar year, beginning on January 1 (1) Facility name, street address,
value and carbon content, the results of
and ending on December 31. physical address, and Federal Registry
all required certification and quality
(c) Content of the annual report. System identification number.
(2) The year covered by the report. assurance tests of continuous
Except as provided in paragraph (d) of monitoring systems and fuel flow
this section, each annual GHG (3) Date of submittal.
(4) Total facility GHG emissions meters if applicable, and analytical
emissions report shall contain the results for the development of site-
following information: aggregated for all stationary fuel
combustion units calculated according specific emissions factors.
(1) Facility name or supplier name (as
appropriate), street address, physical to any appropriate method specified in (3) Documentation of the process used
address, and Federal Registry System § 98.33(a) and expressed in metric tons to collect the necessary data for the GHG
identification number. of CO2, CH4, N2O, and CO2e. If Equation emissions calculations.
(2) Year covered by the report. C–2a or C–9 of subpart C are selected, (4) The GHG emissions calculations
(3) Date of submittal. the high heat value for all types of fuel and methods used.
(4) Annual emissions of CO2, CH4, shall be determined monthly. (5) All emission factors used for the
N2O, and each fluorinated GHG. (5) A signed and dated certification GHG emissions calculations.
Emissions must be calculated assuming statement provided by the designated
representative of the owner or operator, (6) Any facility operating data or
no capture of CO2 and reported at the process information used for the GHG
following levels: according to the requirements of
§ 98.4(e)(1). emission calculations.
(i) Total facility emissions aggregated
(e) Emission Calculations. In (7) Names and documentation of key
from all applicable source categories in
preparing the GHG emissions report, facility personnel involved in
subparts C through JJ of this part and
you must use the emissions calculation calculating and reporting the GHG
expressed in metric tons of CO2e
protocols specified in the relevant emissions.
calculated using Equation A–1 of this
subpart. subparts, except as specified in (8) The annual GHG emissions
(ii) Total emissions aggregated from paragraph (d) of this section. reports.
all applicable supply categories in (f) Verification. To verify the (9) A log book, documenting
subparts KK through PP of this part and completeness and accuracy of reported procedural changes (if any) to the GHG
expressed in metric tons of CO2e GHG emissions, the Administrator may emissions accounting methods and
calculated using Equation A–1 of this review the certification statements changes (if any) to the instrumentation
subpart. described in paragraphs (c)(8) and (d)(5) critical to GHG emissions calculations.
(iii) Emissions from each applicable of this section and any other credible (10) Missing data computations.
source category or supply category in evidence, in conjunction with a
comprehensive review of the emissions (11) A written quality assurance
subparts C through PP of this part, performance plan (QAPP). Upon request
expressed in metric tons of each GHG. reports and periodic audits of selected
reporting facilities. Nothing in this from regulatory authorities, the owner
(iv) Emissions and other data for or operator shall make all information
individual units, processes, activities, section prohibits the Administrator from
using additional information to verify that is collected in conformance with
and operations as specified for each the QAPP available for review during an
source category in the ‘‘Data reporting the completeness and accuracy of the
reports. audit. Electronic storage of the
requirements’’ section of each information in the QAPP is permissible,
applicable subpart of this part. (g) Recordkeeping. An owner or
operator that is required to report GHG provided that the information can be
(5) Total electricity generated onsite
emissions under this part must keep made available in hard copy upon
in kilowatt hours.
records as specified in this paragraph. request during an audit. At a minimum,
(6) Total pounds of synthetic fertilizer
You must retain all required records for the QAPP plan shall include (or refer to
produced at the facility and total
at least 5 years. The records shall be separate documents that contain) a
nitrogen contained in that fertilizer.
(7) Total annual mass of CO2 captured kept in an electronic or hard-copy detailed description of the procedures
in metric tons. format (as appropriate) and recorded in that are used for the following activities:
(8) A signed and dated certification a form that is suitable for expeditious (i) Maintenance and repair of all
statement provided by the designated inspection and review. Upon request by continuous monitoring systems, flow
representative of the owner or operator, EPA, the records required under this meters, and other instrumentation used
according to the requirements of section must be made available to the to provide data for the GHG emissions
§ 98.4(e)(1). Administrator. For records that are reported under this part. A maintenance
(d) Abbreviated emissions report. In electronically generated or maintained, log shall be kept.
lieu of the report required by paragraph the equipment or software necessary to (ii) Calibrations and other quality
(c) of this section, the owner or operator read the records shall be made available, assurance tests performed on the
of an existing facility that is in operation or, if requested by EPA, electronic continuous monitoring systems, flow
on January 1, 2010 and that is subject records shall be converted to paper meters, and other instrumentation used
to § 98.2(a)(3) may submit an documents. You must retain the to provide data for the GHG emissions
abbreviated GHG emissions report for following records, in addition to those reported under this part.
§ 98.4 Authorization and responsibilities of those individuals with primary representations, actions, inactions, and
the designated representative. responsibility for obtaining the submissions of the designated
(a) General. Except as provided under information, I certify that the statements representative and any alternate
paragraph (f) of this section, each owner and information are to the best of my designated representative, as if the new
or operator that is subject to this part, knowledge and belief true, accurate, and owner or operator were included in
shall have one and only one designated complete. I am aware that there are such list. Within 30 days following any
representative responsible for certifying significant penalties for submitting false change in the owners and operators,
and submitting GHG emissions reports statements and information or omitting including the addition of a new owner
and any other submissions to the required statements and information, or operator, the designated
Administrator under this part. including the possibility of fine or representative or any alternate
(b) Authorization of a designated imprisonment.’’ designated representative shall submit a
representative. The designated (2) The Administrator will accept a revision to the certificate of
representative of the facility shall be GHG emission report or other representation under this section
selected by an agreement binding on the submission under this part only if the amending the list of owners and
owners and operators and shall act in submission is signed and certified in operators to include the change.
accordance with the certification accordance with paragraph (e)(1) of this (i) Certificate of representation. A
statements in paragraph (i)(4) of this section. complete certificate of representation for
section. The designated representative (f) Alternate designated a designated representative or an
must be an individual having representative. A certificate of alternate designated representative shall
responsibility for the overall operation representation under this section may include the following elements in a
of the facility or activity such as the designate an alternate designated format prescribed by the Administrator:
position of the plant manager, operator representative, who may act on behalf of (1) Identification of the facility or
of a well or a well field, superintendent, the designated representative. The supply operation for which the
position of equivalent responsibility, or agreement by which the alternate certificate of representation is
an individual or position having overall designated representative is selected submitted.
responsibility for enviromental matters shall include a procedure for
(2) The name, address, e-mail address
for the company. authorizing the alternate designated
(c) Responsibility of the designated (if any), telephone number, and
representative to act in lieu of the
representative. Upon receipt by the facsimile transmission number (if any)
designated representative.
Administrator of a complete certificate (1) Upon receipt by the Administrator of the designated representative and any
of representation under this section, the of a complete certificate of alternate designated representative.
designated representative of the facility representation under this section, any (3) A list of the owners and operators
shall represent and, by his or her representation, action, inaction, or of the facility or supply operation.
representations, actions, inactions, or submission by the alternate designated (4) The following certification
submissions, legally bind each owner representative shall be deemed to be a statements by the designated
and operator in all matters pertaining to representation, action, inaction, or representative and any alternate
this part, notwithstanding any submission by the designated designated representative:
agreement between the designated representative. (i) ‘‘I certify that I was selected as the
representative and such owners and (2) Except in this section, whenever designated representative or alternate
operators. The owners and operators the term ‘‘designated representative’’ is designated representative, as applicable,
shall be bound by any decision or order used, the term shall be construed to by an agreement binding on the owners
issued to the designated representative include the designated representative or and operators that are subject to the
by the Administrator or a court. any alternate designated representative. requirements of 40 CFR 98.3.’’
(d) Timing. No GHG emissions report (g) Changing a designated (ii) ‘‘I certify that I have all the
or other submissions under this part representative or alternate designated necessary authority to carry out my
will be accepted until the Administrator representative. The designated duties and responsibilities under the
has received a complete certificate of representative (or alternate designated Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting
representation under this section for a representative) may be changed at any Program on behalf of the owners and
designated representative of the owner time upon receipt by the Administrator operators that are subject to the
or operator. of a superseding complete certificate of requirements of 40 CFR 98.3 and that
(e) Certification of the GHG emissions representation under this section. each such owner and operator shall be
report. Each GHG emission report and Notwithstanding any such change, all fully bound by my representations,
any other submission under this part representations, actions, inactions, and actions, inactions, or submissions.’’
shall be submitted, signed, and certified submissions by the previous designated (iii) ‘‘I certify that the owners and
by the designated representative in representative (or alternate designated operators that are subject to the
accordance with 40 CFR 3.10. representative) before the time and date requirements of 40 CFR 98.3 shall be
(1) Each such submission shall when the Administrator receives the bound by any order issued to me by the
include the following certification superseding certificate of representation Administrator or a court regarding the
statement by the designated shall be binding on the new designated source or unit.’’
representative: ‘‘I am authorized to representative and the owners and (iv) ‘‘Where there are multiple holders
make this submission on behalf of the operators. of a legal or equitable title to, or a
owners and operators of the facility (or (h) Changes in owners and operators. leasehold interest in, a facility (or
supply operation, as appropriate) for In the event a new owner or operator is supply operation as appropriate) that is
which the submission is made. I certify not included in the list of owners and subject to the requirements of 40 CFR
under penalty of law that I have operators in the certificate of 98.3, I certify that I have given a written
personally examined, and am familiar representation under this section, such notice of my selection as the ‘designated
with, the statements and information new owner or operator shall be deemed representative’ or ‘alternate designated
submitted in this document and all its to be subject to and bound by the representative’, as applicable, and of the
attachments. Based on my inquiry of certificate of representation, the agreement by which I was selected to
each owner and operator that is subject Accuracy of a measurement at a Anode effect is a process upset
to the requirements of 40 CFR 98.3.’’ specified level (e.g., one percent of full condition of an aluminum electrolysis
(5) The signature of the designated scale) means that the mean of repeat cell caused by too little alumina
representative and any alternate measurements made by a device or dissolved in the electrolyte. The anode
designated representative and the dates technique has a 95 percent chance of effect begins when the voltage rises
signed. falling within the range bounded by the rapidly and exceeds a threshold voltage,
(j) Documents of Agreement. Unless true value plus or minus the specified typically 8 volts.
otherwise required by the level. Anode Effect Minutes Per Cell Day (24
Administrator, documents of agreement Acid gas means hydrogen sulfide hours) are the total minutes during
referred to in the certificate of (H2S) and carbon dioxide (CO2) which an electrolysis cell voltage is
representation shall not be submitted to contaminants that are separated from above the threshold voltage, typically 8
the Administrator. The Administrator sour natural gas by an acid gas removal volts.
shall not be under any obligation to process. ANSI means the American National
review or evaluate the sufficiency of Acid gas removal unit (AGR) means a Standards Institute.
such documents, if submitted. process unit that separates hydrogen Anti-static wrap means wrap used to
(k) Binding nature of the certificate of sulfide and/or carbon dioxide from sour assist the process of ensuring that all
representation. Once a complete natural gas using liquid or solid fugitive emissions from a single source
certificate of representation under this absorbents, such as liquid absorbents, are captured and directed to a
section has been submitted and solid adsorbents, or membrane measurement instrument.
received, the Administrator will rely on separators. API means the American Petroleum
the certificate of representation unless Acid gas removal vent stack fugitive Institute.
and until a superseding complete emissions mean the acid gas (typically Argon-oxygen decarburization (AOD)
certificate of representation under this CO2 and H2S) separated from the acid vessel means any closed-bottom,
section is received by the Administrator. gas absorbing medium (most commonly refractory-lined converter vessel with
(l) Objections concerning a designated an amine solution) and released with submerged tuyeres through which
representative. (1) Except as provided in methane and other light hydrocarbons gaseous mixtures containing argon and
paragraph (g) of this section, no to the atmosphere or a flare. oxygen or nitrogen may be blown into
objection or other communication Acid Rain Program means the molten steel for further refining to
submitted to the Administrator program established under title IV of the reduce the carbon content of the steel.
concerning the authorization, or any Clean Air Act, and implemented under ASME means the American Society of
representation, action, inaction, or parts 72 through 78 of this chapter for Mechanical Engineers.
submission, of the designated the reduction of sulfur dioxide and ASTM means the American Society of
representative or alternate designated nitrogen oxides emissions. Testing and Materials.
representative shall affect any Actual conditions mean temperature, B0 means the maximum CH4
representation, action, inaction, or pressure and volume at measurement producing capacity of a waste stream, kg
submission of the designated conditions of natural gas. CH4/kg COD.
representative or alternate designated Actuation means, for the purposes of Backpressure means impeding the
representative, or the finality of any this rule, an event in which a natural natural atmospheric release of fugitive
decision or order by the Administrator gas pneumatically driven valve is emissions by enclosing the release with
under the Mandatory Greenhouse Gas opened and/or closed by release of a lower capacity sampling device and
Reporting Program. natural gas pressure to the atmosphere. altering natural flow.
(2) The Administrator will not Administrator means the Basic oxygen furnace means any
adjudicate any private legal dispute Administrator of the United States refractory-lined vessel in which high-
concerning the authorization or any Environmental Protection Agency or the purity oxygen is blown under pressure
representation, action, inaction, or Administrator’s authorized through a bath of molten iron, scrap
submission of any designated representative. metal, and fluxes to produce steel.
representative or alternate designated AGA means the American Gas Biodiesel means any liquid biofuel
representative. Association suitable as a diesel fuel substitute or a
§ 98.5 How do I submit my report?
Air injected flare means a flare in diesel fuel additive or extender.
which air is blown into the base of a Biodiesel fuels are usually made from
Each GHG emissions report for a
flare stack to induce complete agricultural oils or from animal tallow.
facility or supplier must be submitted Biogenic CO2 means carbon dioxide
combustion of low Btu natural gas (i.e.,
electronically on behalf of the owners emissions generated as the result of
high non-combustible component
and operators of that facility or supplier biomass combustion.
content).
by their designated representative, in a Alkali bypass means a duct between Biomass means non-fossilized and
format specified by the Administrator. the feed end of the kiln and the biodegradable organic material
§ 98.6 What definitions do I need to preheater tower through which a originating from plants, animals and
understand? portion of the kiln exit gas stream is micro-organisms, including products,
All terms used in this part shall have withdrawn and quickly cooled by air or by-products, residues and waste from
the same meaning given in the Clean Air water to avoid excessive buildup of agriculture, forestry and related
Act and in this section. alkali, chloride and/or sulfur on the raw industries as well as the non-fossilized
Abandoned (closed) mines mean feed. This may also be referred to as the and biodegradable organic fractions of
mines that are no longer operational ‘‘kiln exhaust gas bypass.’’ industrial and municipal wastes,
(per MSHA definition). Anaerobic digester means the including gases and liquids recovered
Absorbent circulation pump means a equipment designed and operated for from the decomposition of non-
pump commonly powered by natural waste stabilization by the microbial fossilized and biodegradable organic
gas pressure that circulates the reduction of complex organic material.
absorbent liquid between the absorbent compounds to CO2 and CH4, which is Blast furnace means a furnace that is
regenerator and natural gas contactor. captured and flared or used as a fuel. located at an integrated iron and steel
plant and is used for the production of ethane and heavier. The characteristics different oil and gas leases, mineral fee
molten iron from iron ore pellets and for this fraction, as reported in Table tracts, lease tracts, subsurface or surface
other iron bearing materials. MM–2, are derived from the mixture of unit areas, surface fee tracts, surface
Bleed rate means the rate at which 31 percent ethane and 29 percent lease tracts, or separate surface sites,
natural gas flows continuously or propane as reported in Table MM–1, whether or not connected by a road,
intermittently from a process and 41 percent C4+. These proportions waterway, power line, or pipeline, shall
measurement instrument to a valve are determined from an example API be considered part of the same CO2
actuator controller where it is vented E&PTankCalc run on 34°API crude oil production well facility.
(bleeds) to the atmosphere. from a separator temperature of 100 °F Carbon dioxide stream means carbon
Blendstocks are naphthas used for and pressure of 40 psig. dioxide that has been captured from an
blending or compounding into finished C4+ means the NGL fraction emission source (e.g., a power plant or
motor gasoline. These include RBOB consisting of hydrocarbon molecules other industrial facility) or extracted
(reformulated gasoline for oxygenate butane and heavier. The characteristics from a carbon dioxide production well
blending), CBOB (conventional gasoline for this fraction, as reported in Table plus incidental associated substances
for oxygebate blending), and GTAB MM–2, are derived from the mixture of either derived from the source materials
(gasoline treated as blendstock). 39 percent ‘‘pentanes plus’’ and 61 and the capture process or extracted
Blowdown means manual or percent butane as reported in Table with the carbon dioxide.
automatic opening of valves to relieve MM–1. These proportions are Carbon share means the weight
pressure and or release natural gas from determined from an example API percentage of carbon in any product.
but not limited to process vessels, E&PTankCalc run on 34°API crude oil Carbonate means compounds
compressors, storage vessels or from a separator temperature of 100 °F containing the radical CO3¥2. Upon
pipelines by venting natural gas to the and pressure of 40 psig. calcination, the carbonate radical
atmosphere or a flare. This practice is C5+ is pentane plus in the specific decomposes to evolve carbon dioxide
often implemented prior to shutdown or chemical composition that underlies the (CO2). Common carbonates consumed in
maintenance. default factors in Table MM–1. the mineral industry include calcium
Blowdown vent stack fugitive C6+ means NGL fraction consisting of carbonate (CaCO3) or calcite;
emissions mean natural gas released due hydrocarbon molecules hexane and magnesium carbonate (MgCO3) or
to maintenance and/or blowdown heavier. The characteristics for this magnesite; and calcium-magnesium
operations including but not limited to fraction, as reported in Table MM–2, are carbonate (CaMg(CO3)2) or dolomite.
compressor blowdown and Emergency derived from the assumption that Carbonate-based mineral means any
Shut-Down system testing. ‘‘pentane plus’’, as reported in Table of the following minerals used in the
Boil-off gas means natural gas that MM–1, consists of a mixture of 53 manufacture of glass: calcium carbonate
vaporizes from liquefied natural gas in percent C6+ and 47 percent pentane. (CaCO3), calcium magnesium carbonate
storage tanks. These proportions are determined from (CaMg(CO3)2), and sodium carbonate
British Thermal Unit or Btu means the an example API E&PTankCalc run on (Na2CO3).
quantity of heat required to raise the 34°API crude oil from a separator Carbonate-based mineral mass
temperature of one pound of water by temperature of 100 °F and pressure of 40 fraction means the following: for
one degree Fahrenheit at about 39.2 psig. limestone, the mass fraction of CaCO3 in
degrees Fahrenheit. Calibrated bag means a flexible, non- the limestone; for dolomite, the mass
Bulk, with respect to industrial GHG elastic bag of a calibrated volume that fraction of CaMg(CO3)2 in the dolomite;
suppliers, means the transfer of a can be quickly affixed to a fugitive and for soda ash, the mass fraction of
product inside containers, including but emitting source such that the fugitive Na2CO3 in the soda ash.
not limited to tanks, cylinders, drums, emissions inflate the bag to its Carbonate-based raw material means
and pressure vessels. calibrated volume. any of the following materials used in
Butane (C4H10) or n-Butane means the Carbon black oil means a heavy the manufacture of glass: limestone,
normally gaseous straight-chain or aromatic oil that may be derived either dolomite, and soda ash.
branch-chain hydrocarbon extracted as a by-product of petroleum refining or Carrier gas means the gas with which
from natural gas or refinery gas streams metallurgical coke production. Carbon cover gas is mixed to transport and
and is designated in ASTM black oil consists mainly of unsaturated dilute the cover gas thus maximizing its
Specification D1835 and Gas Processors hydrocarbons, predominately higher efficient use. Carrier gases typically
Association Specifications for than C14. include CO2, N2, and/or dry air.
commercial butane. Not included in this Carbon dioxide equivalent or CO2e Catalytic cracking unit means a
definition is isobutene, which normally means the number of metric tons of CO2 refinery process unit in which
is used for feedstock. emissions with the same global warming petroleum derivatives are continuously
Butylene (C2H8) is an olefinic potential as one metric ton of another charged and hydrocarbon molecules in
hydrocarbon recovered from refinery primary greenhouse gas. the presence of a catalyst are fractured
processes and used as a feedstock. Carbon dioxide production well into smaller molecules, or react with a
By-product coke oven battery means a means any hole drilled in the earth to contact material suspended in a
group of ovens connected by common extract a carbon dioxide stream from a fluidized bed to improve feedstock
walls, where coal undergoes destructive geologic formation or group of quality for additional processing and the
distillation under positive pressure to formations which contain deposits of catalyst or contact material is
produce coke and coke oven gas from carbon dioxide. continuously regenerated by burning off
which by-products are recovered. Carbon dioxide production well coke and other deposits. Catalytic
By-product formation is the quantity facility means one or more carbon cracking units include both fluidized
of fluorinated GHGs created during the dioxide production wells that are bed systems, which are referred to as
etching or chamber cleaning processes located on one or more contiguous or fluid catalytic cracking units (FCCU),
in an electronics manufacturing process. adjacent properties, which are under the and moving bed systems, which are also
C2+ means the NGL fraction control of the same entity. Carbon referred to as thermal catalytic cracking
consisting of hydrocarbon molecules dioxide production wells located on units. The unit includes the riser,
reactor, regenerator, air blowers, spent Chemical recovery furnace means an Completely recaptured means 99.99
catalyst or contact material stripper, enclosed combustion device where percent or greater of each GHG is
catalyst or contact material recovery concentrated spent liquor produced by removed from a process stream.
equipment, and regenerator equipment the kraft or soda pulping process is Component, for the purposes of
for controlling air pollutant emissions burned to recover pulping chemicals subpart W only, means but is not
and for heat recovery. and produce steam. Includes any limited to each metal to metal joint or
Cattle and swine deep bedding means recovery furnace that burns spent seal of non-welded connection
as manure accumulates, bedding is pulping liquor produced from both the separated by a compression gasket,
continually added to absorb moisture kraft and soda pulping processes. screwed thread (with or without thread
over a production cycle and possibly for Chloride process means a production sealing compound), metal to metal
as long as 6 to 12 months. This manure process where titanium dioxide is compression, or fluid barrier through
management system also is known as a produced using calcined petroleum which natural gas or liquid can escape
bedded pack manure management coke and chlorine as raw materials. to the atmosphere.
system and may be combined with a dry Close-range means, for the purposes Compressor means any machine for
lot or pasture. of this rule, safely accessible within the raising the pressure of a natural gas by
CBOB or conventional gasoline for operator’s arm’s reach from the ground drawing in low pressure natural gas and
oxygenate blending means a petroleum or stationary platforms. discharging significantly higher
product which, when blended with a CO2 means carbon dioxide. pressure natural gas (i.e., compression
specified type and percentage of Coal means all solid fuels classified as ratio higher than 1.5).
oxygenate, meets the definition of anthracite, bituminous, sub-bituminous, Compressor fugitive emissions mean
conventional gasoline. or lignite by the American Society for natural gas emissions from all
Centrifugal compressor means any Testing and Materials Designation components in close physical proximity
equipment that increases the pressure of ASTM D388–05 ‘‘Standard to compressors where mechanical and
a process natural gas by centrifugal Classification of Coals by Rank’’ (as thermal cycles may cause elevated
action, employing rotating movement of incorporated by reference in § 98.7). emission rates, including but not
the driven shaft. COD means the chemical oxygen limited to open-ended blowdown vent
Centrifugal compressor dry seals demand as determined using methods stacks, piping and tubing connectors
mean a series of rings that are located specified pursuant to 40 CFR Part 136. and flanges, pressure relief valves,
around the compressor shaft where it Coke (petroleum) means a solid pneumatic starter open-ended lines,
exits the compressor case and that residue consisting mainly of carbon instrument connections, cylinder valve
operate mechanically under the which results from the cracking of covers, and fuel valves.
opposing forces to prevent natural gas petroleum hydrocarbons in processes Condensate means hydrocarbon and
from escaping to the atmosphere. such as coking and fluid coking. This other liquid separated from natural gas
Centrifugal compressor dry seals includes catalyst coke deposited on a that condenses due to changes in the
fugitive emissions mean natural gas catalyst during the refining process temperature, pressure, or both, and
released from a dry seal vent pipe and/ which must be burned off in order to remains liquid at storage conditions,
or the seal face around the rotating shaft regenerate the catalyst. includes both water and hydrocarbon
where it exits one or both ends of the Coke burn-off means the coke liquids.
compressor case. removed from the surface of a catalyst Connector means but is not limited to
Centrifugal compressor wet seals by combustion during catalyst flanged, screwed, or other joined fittings
mean a series of rings around the regeneration. Coke burn-off also means used to connect pipe line segments,
compressor shaft where it exits the the coke combusted in fluid coking unit tubing, pipe components (such as
compressor case, that use oil circulated burner. elbows, reducers, ‘‘T’s’’ or valves) or a
under high pressure between the rings Cokemaking means the production of pipe line and a piece of equipment or
to prevent natural gas from escaping to coke from coal in either a by-product an instrument to a pipe, tube or piece
the atmosphere. coke oven battery or a non-recovery of equipment. A common connector is
Centrifugal compressor wet seals coke oven battery. a flange. Joined fittings welded
fugitive emissions mean natural gas Cold and steady emissions mean a completely around the circumference of
released from the seal face around the nearly constant and steady emissions the interface are not considered
rotating shaft where it exits one or both stream that is low enough in connectors for the purpose of this
ends of the compressor case PLUS the temperature (i.e., less than 140 degrees regulation.
natural gas absorbed in the circulating Fahrenheit) to be safely directly Container glass means glass made of
seal oil and vented to the atmosphere measured by a person. soda-lime recipe, clear or colored,
from a seal oil degassing vessel or sump Commercial Applications means any which is pressed and/or blown into
before the oil is re-circulated, or from a use including but not limited to: Food bottles, jars, ampoules, and other
seal oil containment vessel vent. and beverage, industrial and municipal products listed in North American
Certified standards means calibration water/wastewater treatment, metal Industry Classification System 327213
gases certified by the manufacturer of fabrication, including welding and (NAICS 327213).
the calibration gases to be accurate to cutting, greenhouse uses for plant Continuous emission monitoring
within 2 percent of the value on the growth, fumigants (e.g., grain storage) system or CEMS means the total
label or calibration gases. and herbicides, pulp and paper, equipment required to sample, analyze,
CH4 means methane. cleaning and solvent use, fire fighting, measure, and provide, by means of
Chemical recovery combustion unit transportation and storage of explosives, readings recorded at least once every 15
means a combustion device, such as a enhanced oil and natural gas recovery, minutes, a permanent record of gas
recovery furnace or fluidized-bed long-term storage (sequestration), or concentrations, pollutant emission rates,
reactor where spent pulping liquor from research and development. or gas volumetric flow rates from
sulfite or semi-chemical pulping Completely destroyed means stationary sources.
processes is burned to recover pulping destroyed with a destruction efficiency Continuous glass melting furnace
chemicals. of 99.99 percent or greater. means a glass melting furnace that
operates continuously except during Delayed coking unit means one or Diesel fuel means a low sulfur fuel oil
periods of maintenance, malfunction, more refinery process units in which of grades 1BD or 2BD, as defined by the
control device installation, high molecular weight petroleum American Society for Testing and
reconstruction, or rebuilding. derivatives are thermally cracked and Materials standard ASTM D975–91,
Control method means any equipment petroleum coke is produced in a series ‘‘Standard Specification for Diesel Fuel
used for recovering and/or oxidizing air of closed, batch system reactors. Oils’’ (as incorporated by reference in
emissions of methane. Such equipment De-methanizer means the natural gas § 98.7), grades 1–GT or 2–GT, as defined
includes, but is not limited to, vapor processing unit that separates methane by ASTM D2880–90a, ‘‘Standard
recovery systems, absorbers, carbon rich residue gas from the heavier Specification for Gas Turbine Fuel Oils’’
dioxide adsorbers, condensers, hydrocarbons (ethane, propane, butane, (as incorporated by reference in § 98.7),
incinerators, flares, catalytic oxidizers, pentane-plus) in feed natural gas stream. or fuel oil numbers 1 or 2, as defined by
boilers, and process heaters. Density means the mass contained in ASTM D396–90a, ‘‘Standard
Conventional gasoline means any a given unit volume (mass/volume). Specification for Fuel Oils’’ (as
gasoline which has not been certified Destruction means, with respect to incorporated by reference in § 98.7).
under § 80.40. underground coal mines, the Diesel fuel No. 1 has a distillation
Cover gas means SF6, HFC–134a, combustion of methane in any on-site or temperature of 550 °F at the 90 percent
fluorinated ketone (FK 5–1–12) or other off-site combustion technology. recovery point and conforms to ASTM
gas used to protect the surface of molten D975–08 (2007) Standard Specification
Destroyed methane includes, but is not
magnesium from rapid oxidation and for Diesel Fuel Oils. It is used in high
limited to, methane combusted by
burning in the presence of air. The speed diesel engines such as city buses.
flaring, methane destroyed by thermal
molten magnesium may be the surface Compared to fuel oil No. 1 it has a
oxidation, methane combusted for use
of a casting or ingot production higher octane number, a lower sulfur
in on-site energy or heat production
operation or the surface of a crucible of content, and a higher flash point. It is
technologies, methane that is conveyed
molten magnesium that is the source of blended with diesel No. 2 in the colder
through pipelines (including natural gas
the casting operation. regions of the country to facility cold
pipelines) for off-site combustion, and
Crude oil means any of the naturally starts.
methane that is collected for any other Diesel fuel No. 2 has a distillation
occurring liquids and semi-solids found on-site or off-site use as a fuel. temperature of 500 °F at the 10 percent
in rock formations composed of Destruction means, with respect to recovery point and 640 °F at the 90
complex mixtures of hydrocarbons fluorinated GHGs, the expiration of a percent recovery point and is defined in
ranging from one to hundreds of carbon fluorinated GHG to the destruction ASTM D975. It is used in high speed
atoms in straight and branched chains efficiency actually achieved. Such diesel engines, such as locomotives,
and rings. destruction does not result in a trucks and automobiles. Currently, there
Daily spread means manure is commercially useful end product. are three categories of diesel fuel No. 2
routinely removed from a confinement Destruction Efficiency means the defined by sulfur content: High sulfur
facility and is applied to cropland or efficiency with which a destruction (>0.05%/wgt), low sulfur (<0.05%/wgt),
pasture within 24 hours of excretion. device reduces the GWP-weighted mass and ultra low sulfur (<0.0015%/wgt).
Degasification systems mean wells of greenhouse gases fed into the device, Ultra low sulfur is used for on road
drilled from the surface or boreholes considering the GWP-weighted masses vehicles.
drilled inside the mine that remove of both the greenhouse gases fed into the Diesel fuel No. 4, made by blending
large volumes of CH4 before, during, or device and those exhausted from the diesel fuel and residual fuel and
after mining. Pre-mining degasification device. The Destruction Efficiency is conforming to ASTM D975, is used for
systems refer to drainage wells drilled expressed in the following Equation A– low and medium speed diesel engines.
through a coal seam or seams and cased 2: Digesters are systems where animal
to pre-drain the methane prior to excreta are collected and anaerobically
mining. The wells are normally placed tCO2 eOUT digested in a large containment vessel or
in operation 2 to 7 years ahead of DE = 1 − (Eq. A-2) covered lagoon. Digesters are designed
mining. Degasification systems also tCO2 eIN
and operated for waste stabilization by
include ‘‘gob wells’’ which recover Where: the microbial reduction of complex
methane from the longwall face area organic compounds to CO2 and CH4,
during and after mining. DE = Destruction Efficiency which is captured and may be flared or
Degradable organic carbon (DOC) tCO2eIN = The GWP-weighted mass of GHGs used as fuel. There are multiple types of
means the fraction of the total mass of fed into the destruction device anaerobic digestion systems, including
a waste material that can be biologically tCO2eOUT = The GWP-weighted mass of
GHGs exhausted from the destruction
covered lagoon, complete mix, plug
degraded. flow, and fixed film digesters.
device, including GHGs formed during
Dehydrator means, for the purposes of Direct liquefaction means the
the destruction process
this rule, a device in which a liquid conversion of coal directly into liquids,
absorbent (including but not limited to Destruction efficiency, or flaring rather than passing through an
desiccant, ethylene glycol, diethylene destruction efficiency, refers to the intermediate gaseous state.
glycol, or triethylene glycol) directly fraction of the gas that leaves the flare Direct reduction furnace means a high
contacts a natural gas stream to absorb partially or fully oxidized temperature furnace typically fired with
water vapor. Destruction or removal efficiency natural gas to produce solid iron from
Dehydrator vent stack fugitive (DRE) is the efficiency of a control iron ore or iron ore pellets and coke,
emissions means natural gas released device to destroy or remove F–GHG and coal, or other carbonaceous materials.
from a natural gas dehydrator system N2O. The DRE is equal to one minus the Distillate fuel oil means a
absorbent (typically glycol) reboiler or ratio of the mass of all relevant GHG classification for one of the petroleum
regenerator, including stripping natural exiting the emission control device to fractions produced in conventional
gas and motive natural gas used in the mass of GHG entering the emission distillation operations and from crackers
EP10AP09.001</MATH>
absorbent circulation pumps. control device. and hydrotreating process units. The
generic term distillate fuel oil includes conditions of load shedding, peak stationary equipment located on one or
both diesel fuels (Diesel Fuels No. 1, No. shaving, power interruptions pursuant more contiguous or adjacent properties
2, and No. 4) and fuel oils (Fuel oil No. to an interruptible power service in actual physical contact or separated
1, No. 2, and No. 4). Fuel oils are used agreement, or scheduled facility solely by a public roadway or other
primarily for space heating, in industrial maintenance shall not be considered an public right-of-way and under common
and commercial boilers and furnaces emergency engine. ownership or common control, that
and for electric power generation. Diesel Engineering estimation means an emits or may emit any greenhouse gas.
fuels are used in on-highway vehicles as estimate of fugitive emissions based on Operators of military installations may
well as in off highway engines, such as engineering principles applied to classify such installations as more than
locomotives, marine engines, measured and/or approximated physical a single facility based on distinct and
agricultural and construction parameters such as dimensions of independent functional groupings
equipment. containment, actual pressures, actual within contiguous military properties.
DOCf means the fraction of DOC that temperatures, and compositions. Feed means the prepared and mixed
actually decomposes under the Equipment means but is not limited to materials, which include but are not
(presumably anaerobic) conditions each pump, compressor, pipe, pressure limited to materials such as limestone,
within the landfill. relief device, sampling connection clay, shale, sand, iron ore, mill scale,
Dry lot means a paved or unpaved system, open-ended valve or line, valve, cement kiln dust and flyash, that are fed
open confinement area without any connector, surge control vessel, tank, to the kiln. Feed does not include the
significant vegetative cover where vessel, and instrumentation system in fuels used in the kiln to produce heat to
accumulating manure may be removed natural gas or liquid service; and any form the clinker product.
periodically. control devices or systems referenced by Feedstock means raw material inputs
Electric arc furnace (EAF) means a this subpart. to a process that are transformed by
furnace that produces molten alloy Equipment chambers means the total reaction, oxidation, or other chemical or
metal and heats the charge materials natural gas-containing volume within physical methods into products and by-
with electric arcs from carbon any equipment and between the products. Supplemental fuel burned to
electrodes. equipment isolation valves. provide heat or thermal energy is not a
Electric arc furnace steelmaking Ethane (C2H6) is a colorless paraffinic feedstock.
means the production of carbon, alloy, gas that boils at temperatures of Finished aviation gasoline means a
or specialty steels using an EAF. This ¥127.48 °F. It is extracted from natural complex mixture of volatile
definition excludes EAFs at steel gas and from refinery gas streams. hydrocarbons, with or without
foundries and EAFs used to produce Ethane is a major feedstock for the additives, suitably blended to be used in
nonferrous metals. petrochemical industry. aviation reciprocating engines.
Electrical equipment means any item Ethylene (C2H4) is an olefinic Specifications can be found in ASTM
used for the generation, conversion, hydrocarbon received from refinery Specification D910–07a (2002) and
transmission, distribution or utilization processes or petrochemical processes. Military Specification MIL–G–5572.
of electric energy, such as machines, Ethylene is used as a petrochemical Finished motor gasoline means a
transformers, apparatus, measuring feedstock for numerous chemical complex mixture of volatile
instruments, or protective devices, that applications and the production of hydrocarbons, with or without
contains sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) or consumer goods. additives, suitably blended to be used in
perfluorocarbons (PFCs) (including but Ex refinery gate means the point at spark ignition engines. Motor gasoline,
not limited to gas-insulated switchgear which a refined or semi-refined product defined in ASTM Specifications D4814–
substations (GIS), gas circuit breakers leaves the refinery. 08a (2001) or Federal Specification VV–
(GCB), and power transformers). Experimental furnace means a glass G–1690C, has a boiling range of 122 ° to
Electricity generating unit or EGU melting furnace with the sole purpose of 158 °F at the 10 percent recovery point
means any unit that combusts solid, operating to evaluate glass melting to 365 ° to 374 °F at the 90 percent
liquid, or gaseous fuel and is physically processes, technologies, or glass recovery rate. Motor gasoline includes,
connected to a generator to produce products. An experimental furnace does conventional gasoline, reformulated
electricity. not produce glass that is sold (except for gasoline, and all types of oxygenated
Electrothermic furnace means a further research and development gasoline. Gasoline also has seasonal
furnace that heats the charged materials purposes) or that is used as a raw variations in an effort to control ozone
with electric arcs from carbon material for non-experimental furnaces. levels. This is achieved by lowering the
electrodes. Export means to transport a product Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) of gasoline
Emergency generator means a from inside the United States to persons during the summer driving season.
stationary internal combustion engine outside the United States, excluding Depending on the region of the country
that serves solely as a secondary source United States military bases and ships the RVP is lowered to below 9.0 psi or
of mechanical or electrical power for on-board use. 7.8 psi. The RVP may be further lowered
whenever the primary energy supply is Exporter means any person, company, by state regulations.
disrupted or discontinued during power or organization of record that contracts Fischer-Tropsch process means a
outages or natural disasters that are to transfer a product from the United catalyzed chemical reaction in which
beyond the control of the owner or States to another country or that synthesis gas, a mixture of carbon
operator of a facility. Emergency engines transfers products to an affiliate in monoxide and hydrogen, is converted
operate only during emergency another country, excluding transfers to into liquid hydrocarbons of various
situations or for standard performance United States military bases and ships forms.
testing procedures as required by law or for on-board use. Flare means a combustion device,
by the engine manufacturer. The hours Extracted means production of carbon whether at ground level or elevated, that
of operation per calendar year for such dioxide from carbon dioxide production uses an open flame to burn combustible
standard performance testing shall not wells. gases with combustion air provided by
exceed 100 hours. An engine that serves Facility means any physical property, uncontrolled ambient air around the
as a back-up power source under plant, building, structure, source, or flame.
Flare combustion efficiency means the Fuel ethanol (C2H5OH) is an instrument that has been approved for
fraction of natural gas, on a volume or anhydrous alcohol made either fugitive emissions detection in this rule,
mole basis, that is combusted at the flare chemically from ethylene or biologically namely infrared fugitive emissions
burner tip, assumed 95 percent for non- from the fermentation of sugars from detection instruments, OVAs, and
aspirated field flares and 98 percent for carbohydrates found in agricultural TVAs.
steam or air asperated flares. products. It is used as a gasoline octane Gas collection system or landfill gas
Flare stack means a device used to enhancer and as an oxygenate collection system means a system of
provide a safe means of combustible blendstock. pipes used to collect landfill gas from
natural gas disposal from routine Fuel gas (still gas) means gas different locations in the landfill to a
operations, upsets, or emergencies via generated at a petroleum refinery, single location for treatment (thermal
combustion of the natural gas in an petrochemical plant, or similar destruction) or use. Landfill gas
open, normally elevated flame. industrial process unit, and that is collection systems may also include
Flare stack fugitive emissions means combusted separately or in any knock-out or separator drums and/or a
the CH4 and CO2 content of that portion combination with any type of gas. compressor.
of natural gas (typically 5 percent in Fuel gas system means a system of Gas conditions mean the actual
non-aspirated field flares and 2 percent compressors, piping, knock-out pots, temperature, volume, and pressure of a
in steam or air asperated flares) that mix drums, and, if necessary, units used gas sample.
passes through flares un-combusted and to remove sulfur contaminants from the Gas-fired unit means a stationary
the total CO2 emissions of that portion fuel gas (e.g., amine scrubbers) that combustion unit that derives more than
of the natural gas that is combusted. collects fuel gas from one or more 50 percent of its annual heat input from
Flat glass means glass made of soda- sources for treatment, as necessary, and the combustion of gaseous fuels, and the
lime recipe and produced into transport to a stationary combustion remainder of its annual heat input from
continuous flat sheets and other unit. A fuel gas system may have an the combustion of fuel oil or other
products listed in NAICS 327211. overpressure vent to a flare but the liquid fuels.
Fluid coking unit means one or more primary purpose for a fuel gas system is Gas monitor means an instrument that
refinery process units in which high to provide fuel to the various continuously measures the
molecular weight petroleum derivatives combustion units at the refinery or concentration of a particular gaseous
are thermally cracked and petroleum petrochemical plant. species in the effluent of a stationary
Fuel oil No. 1 has a distillation source.
coke is continuously produced in a
temperature of 400 °F at the 10 percent Gas utilization is the quantity of GHG
fluidized bed system. The fluid coking
recovery point and 550 °F at the 90 gas consumed (and therefore not
unit includes equipment for controlling
percent recovery point and is used available for emission) during the
air pollutant emissions and for heat
primarily as fuel for portable outdoor etching and/or chamber cleaning
recovery on the fluid coking burner
stoves and heaters. It is defined in processes.
exhaust vent. There are two basic types
ASTM D396–08 (2007) Standard Gaseous fuel means a material that is
of fluid coking units: a traditional fluid
Specification for Fuel Oils. in the gaseous state at standard
coking unit in which only a small Fuel oil No. 2 has a distillation atmospheric temperature and pressure
portion of the coke produced in the unit temperature of 400 °F at the 10 percent conditions and that is combusted to
is burned to fuel the unit and the fluid recovery point and 640 °F at the 90 produce heat and/or energy.
coking burner exhaust vent is directed percent recovery point and is defined in Gasification means the conversion of
to the atmosphere (after processing in a ASTM D396. It is used primarily for a solid material into a gas.
CO boiler or other air pollutant control residential heating and for moderate Gathering and boosting station means
equipment) and a flexicoking unit in capacity commercial and industrial a station used to gather natural gas from
which an auxiliary burner is used to burner units. well or field pipelines for delivery to a
partially combust a significant portion Fuel oil No. 4 is a distillate fuel oil natural gas processing facility or central
of the produced petroleum coke to made by blending distillate fuel oil and point. Stations may also provide
generate a low value fuel gas that is residual fuel oil and conforms to ASTM compression, dehydration, and/or
used as fuel in other combustion D396 or Federal Specification VV–F– treating services.
sources at the refinery. 815C. and is used extensively in Glass melting furnace means a unit
Fluorinated greenhouse gas means industrial plants and commercial burner comprising a refractory-lined vessel in
sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), nitrogen installations that are not equipped with which raw materials are charged and
trifluoride (NF3), and any fluorocarbon preheating facilities. melted at high temperature to produce
except for controlled substances as Fugitive emissions means molten glass.
defined at 40 CFR Part 82 Subpart A. In unintentional equipment emissions of Global warming potential or GWP
addition to SF6 and NF3, ‘‘fluorinated methane and/or carbon dioxide means the ratio of the time-integrated
GHG’’ includes but is not limited to any containing natural gas or hydrocarbon radiative forcing from the instantaneous
hydrofluorocarbon, any gas (not including combustion flue gas) release of one kilogram (kg) of a trace
perfluorocarbon, any fully fluorinated from emissions sources including, but substance relative to that of one kg of a
linear, branched or cyclic alkane, ether, not limited to, open ended lines, reference gas, i.e., CO2.
tertiary amine or aminoether, any equipment connections or seals to the GPA means the Gas Processors
perfluoropolyether, and any atmosphere. Fugitive emissions also Association.
hydrofluoropolyether. mean CO2 emissions resulting from Greenhouse gas or GHG means carbon
Fossil fuel means natural gas, combustion of natural gas in flares. dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous
petroleum, coal, or any form of solid, Fugitive emissions detection means oxide (N2O), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6),
liquid, or gaseous fuel derived from the process of identifying emissions hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs),
such material for purpose of creating from equipment, components, and other chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs),
useful heat. point sources. perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and other
Fuel means solid, liquid or gaseous Fugitive emissions detection fluorinated greenhouse gases as defined
combustible material. instruments mean any device or in this section.
Heat Transfer Fluids are F–GHGs that acting on their behalf. The term also maximum distillation temperature of
are liquid at room temperature, have includes, as appropriate: 400 °F at the 10 percent recovery point
appreciable vapor pressures, and are (1) The consignee. and a final maximum boiling point of
used for temperature control during (2) The importer of record. 572 °F. It meets ASTM Specification
certain processes in electronic (3) The actual owner. D1655–08a (2001) and Military
manufacturing. Heat transfer fluids used (4) The transferee, if the right to draw Specification MIL–T–5624P and MIL–
in the electronics sector include merchandise in a bonded warehouse has T–83133D (JP–5 and JP–8).
perfluoropolyethers, perfluoroalkanes, been transferred. Kiln means a device, including any
perfluoroethers, tertiary Indurating furnace means a furnace associated preheater or precalciner
perfluoroamines, and perfluorocyclic where unfired taconite pellets, called devices, that produces clinker by
ethers. green balls, are hardened at high heating limestone and other materials
Heel means the amount of gas that temperatures to produce fired pellets for for subsequent production of portland
remains in a shipping container after it use in a blast furnace. Types of cement.
is discharged or off-loaded (that is no indurating furnaces include straight gate Kiln exhaust gas bypass means alkali
more than ten percent of the volume of and grate kiln furnaces. bypass.
Infrared remote fugitive emissions Landfill means an area of land or an
the container).
detection instrument means an excavation in which wastes are placed
High heat value or HHV means the
instrument that detects infrared light in for permanent disposal and that is not
high or gross heat content of the fuel
the narrow wavelength range absorbed a land application unit, surface
with the heat of vaporization included.
by light hydrocarbons including impoundment, injection well, or waste
The water is assumed to be in a liquid
methane, and presents a signal (sound, pile as those terms are defined under
state.
digital or visual image) indicating the § 257.2 of this chapter.
High volume sampler means an
presence of methane and other light Landfill gas means gas produced as a
atmospheric emissions measurement
hydrocarbon vapor emissions in the result of anaerobic decomposition of
device that captures emissions from a
atmosphere. For the purpose of this waste materials in the landfill. Landfill
source in a calibrated air intake and
rule, it must detect the presence of gas generally contains 40 to 60 percent
uses dual hydrocarbon sensors and
methane. methane on a dry basis, typically less
other devices to measure the flow rate In-line kiln/raw mill means a system than 1 percent non-methane organic
and combustible hydrocarbon in a portland cement production process chemicals, and the remainder being
concentrations of the fugitive emission where a dry kiln system is integrated carbon dioxide.
such that the quantity of emissions is with the raw mill so that all or a portion Lime is the generic term for a variety
determined. of the kiln exhaust gases are used to of chemical compounds that are
Hydrofluorocarbons or HFCs means a perform the drying operation of the raw produced by the calcination of
class of GHGs primarily used as mill, with no auxiliary heat source used. limestone or dolomite. These products
refrigerants, consisting of hydrogen, In this system the kiln is capable of include but are not limited to calcium
fluorine, and carbon. operating without the raw mill oxide, high-calcium quicklime, calcium
Import means, with respect to operating, but the raw mill cannot hydroxide, hydrated lime, dolomitic
fluorinated GHGs and nitrous oxide, to operate without the kiln gases, and quicklime, and dolomitic hydrate.
land on, bring into, or introduce into, consequently, the raw mill does not Liquefied natural gas (LNG) means
any place subject to the jurisdiction of generate a separate exhaust gas stream. natural gas (primarily methane) that has
the United States whether or not such Integrated process means a process been liquefied by reducing its
landing, bringing, or introduction that produces a petrochemical as well as temperature to ¥260 degrees Fahrenheit
constitutes an importation within the one or more other chemicals that are at atmospheric pressure.
meaning of the customs laws of the part of other source categories under Liquefied natural gas import and
United States, with the following this part. An example of an integrated export facilities mean onshore and/or
exemptions: process is the production of both offshore facilities that send out exported
(1) Off-loading used or excess hydrogen for sale (i.e., a merchant or receive imported liquefied natural
fluorinated GHGs or nitrous oxide of hydrogen facility) and methanol from gas, store it in storage tanks, re-gasify it,
U.S. origin from a ship during servicing, synthesis gas created by steam and deliver re-gasified natural gas to
(2) Bringing fluorinated GHGs or reforming of methane. natural gas transmission or distribution
nitrous oxide into the U.S. from Mexico Interstate pipeline means a natural gas systems. The facilities include tanker
where the fluorinated GHGs or nitrous pipeline designated as interstate unloading equipment, liquefied natural
oxide had been admitted into Mexico in pipelines under the Natural Gas Act, 15 gas transportation pipelines, pumps,
bond and were of U.S. origin, and U.S.C. 717a. compressors to liquefy boil-off-gas, re-
(3) Bringing fluorinated GHGs or Intrastate pipeline means a natural condensers, and vaporization units for
nitrous oxide into the U.S. when gas pipeline not subject to the re-gasification of the liquefied natural
transported in a consignment of jurisdiction of the Federal Energy gas.
personal or household effects or in a Regulatory Commission as described in Liquefied natural gas storage facilities
similar non-commercial situation 15 U.S.C. 3301. means an onshore facility that stores
normally exempted from U.S. Customs Isobutane (C4H10) is a normally liquefied natural gas in above ground
attention. gaseous branch chain hydrocarbon storage vessels. The facility may include
Importer means any person, company, extracted from natural gas or refinery equipment for liquefying natural gas,
or organization of record that for any gas streams. A colorless paraffinic gas compressors to liquefy boil-off-gas, re-
reason brings a product into the United that boils at 10.9 °F, it is used as a condensers, and vaporization units for
States from a foreign country. An feedstock in refineries. re-gasification of the liquefied natural
importer includes the person, company, Kerosene-type jet fuel means a gas.
or organization primarily liable for the kerosene-based product used in Liquid/Slurry means manure is stored
payment of any duties on the commercial and military turbojet and as excreted or with some minimal
merchandise or an authorized agent turboprop aircraft. The product has a addition of water to facilitate handling
and is stored in either tanks or earthen Methane conversion factor means the Natural gas means a naturally
ponds, usually for periods less than one extent to which the CH4 producing occurring mixture of hydrocarbon and
year. capacity (Bo) is realized in each type of non-hydrocarbon gases found in
LNG import and export facility treatment and discharge pathway and geologic formations beneath the earth’s
fugitive emissions mean natural gas system. Thus, it is an indication of the surface, of which its constituents
releases from valves, connectors, storage degree to which the system is anaerobic. include, but are not limited to, methane,
tanks, flanges, open-ended lines, Methane correction factor means an heavier hydrocarbons and carbon
pressure relief valves, boil-off-gas adjustment factor applied to the dioxide. Natural gas may be field quality
recovery, send outs (pumps and methane generation rate to account for (which varies widely) or pipeline
vaporizers), packing and gaskets. This portions of the landfill that remain quality. For the purposes of this subpart,
does not include fugitive emissions aerobic. The methane correction factor the definition of natural gas includes
from equipment and equipment can be considered the fraction of the similarly constituted fuels such as field
components reported elsewhere for this total landfill waste volume that is production gas, process gas, and fuel
rule. ultimately disposed of in an anaerobic gas.
LNG storage station fugitive emissions state. Managed landfills that have soil or Natural gas driven pneumatic manual
mean natural gas releases from valves, other cover materials have a methane valve actuator device means valve
connectors, flanges, open-ended lines, correction factor of 1. control devices that use pressurized
storage tanks, pressure relief valves, Miscellaneous products include all natural gas to provide the energy
liquefaction process units, packing and petroleum products not classified required for an operator to manually
gaskets. This does not include fugitive elsewhere. It includes petrolatum lube open, close, or throttle a liquid or gas
emissions from equipment and refining by-products (aromatic extracts stream. Typical manual control
equipment components reported and tars) absorption oils, ram-jet fuel, applications include, but are not limited
elsewhere for this rule. petroleum rocket fuels, synthetic natural to, equipment isolation valves, tank
Lubricants include all grades of gas feedstocks, and specialty oils. drain valves, pipeline valves.
lubricating oils, from spindle oil to Natural gas driven pneumatic manual
MMBtu means million British thermal
cylinder oil to those used in greases. valve actuator device fugitive emissions
units.
Petroleum lubricants may be produced means natural gas released due to
Municipal solid waste landfill or
from distillates or residues. manual actuation of natural gas
MSW landfill means an entire disposal
Makeup chemicals means carbonate pneumatic valve actuation devices,
facility in a contiguous geographical
chemicals (e.g., sodium and calcium including, but not limited to, natural gas
space where household waste is placed
carbonates) that are added to the diaphragm and pneumatic-hydraulic
in or on land. An MSW landfill may
chemical recovery areas of chemical valve actuators.
also receive other types of RCRA Natural gas driven pneumatic pump
pulp mills to replace chemicals lost in
Subtitle D wastes (§ 257.2 of this means a pump that uses pressurized
the process.
Mass-balance approach means a chapter) such as commercial solid natural gas to move a piston or
method for estimating emissions of waste, nonhazardous sludge, diaphragm, which pumps liquids on the
fluorinated greenhouse gases from use conditionally exempt small quantity opposite side of the piston or
in equipment that can be applied to generator waste, and industrial solid diaphragm.
aggregates of units (for example by waste. Portions of an MSW landfill may Natural gas driven pneumatic pump
system). In this approach, annual be separated by access roads. An MSW fugitive emissions means natural gas
emissions are the difference between the landfill may be publicly or privately released from pumps that are powered
quantity of gas consumed in the year owned. or assisted by pressurized natural gas.
and the quantity of gas used to fill the Municipal solid waste or MSW means Natural gas driven pneumatic valve
net increase in equipment capacity or to solid phase household, commercial/ bleed device means valve control
replace destroyed gas. retail, and/or institutional waste, such devices that use pressurized natural gas
Maximum rated heat input capacity as, but not limited to, yard waste and to transmit a process measurement
means the hourly heat input to a unit (in refuse. signal to a valve actuator to
mmBtu/hr), when it combusts the N2O means nitrous oxide. automatically control the valve opening.
maximum amount of fuel per hour that NAESB is the North American Energy Typical bleeding process control
it is capable of combusting on a steady Standards Board. applications include, but are not limited
state basis, as of the initial installation Nameplate capacity means the full to, pressure, temperature, liquid level,
of the unit, as specified by the and proper charge of gas specified by and flow rate regulation.
manufacturer. the equipment manufacturer to achieve Natural gas driven pneumatic valve
Maximum rated input capacity means the equipment’s specified performance. bleed devices fugitive emissions means
the maximum amount of municipal The nameplate capacity is typically the continuous or intermittant release of
solid waste per day (in tons/day) that a indicated on the equipment’s natural gas from automatic process
unit is capable of combusting on a nameplate; it is not necessarily the control loops including the natural gas
steady state basis as of the initial actual charge, which may be influenced pressure signal flowing from a process
installation of the unit as specified by by leakage and other emissions. measurement instrument (e.g. liquid
the manufacturer of the unit. Naphtha-type jet fuel means a fuel in level, pressure, temperature) to a
Mcf means thousand cubic feet. the heavy naphtha boiling range having process control instrument which
Meter means a device that measures an average gravity of 52.8 API and activates a process control valve
gas flow rate from a fugitive emissions meeting Military Specification MIL–T– actuator.
source or through a conduit by detecting 5624L (Grade JP–4). It is used primarily Natural gas liquids (NGL) means
a condition (pressure drop, spin for military turbojet and turboprop those hydrocarbons in natural gas that
induction, temperature loss, electronic aircraft because it has a lower freeze are separated from the gas as liquids
signal) that varies in proportion to flow point than other aviation fuels and through the process of absorption,
rate or measures gas velocity in a meets engine requirements at high condensation, adsorption, or other
manner that can calculate flow rate. altitudes and speeds. methods in gas processing or cycling
plants. Generally, such liquids consist Non-recovery coke oven battery means Open-ended valve or Lines (OELs)
of primarily ethane, propane, butane, a group of ovens connected by common means any valve, except pressure relief
and isobutane, primarily pentanes walls and operated as a unit, where coal valves, having one side of the valve seat
produced from natural gas at lease undergoes destructive distillation under in contact with process fluid and one
separators and field facilities. For the negative pressure to produce coke, and side open to atmosphere, either directly
purposes of subpart NN only, natural which is designed for the combustion of or through open piping.
gas liquids does not include lease the coke oven gas from which by- Operating hours means the duration
condensate. Bulk NGLs refers to products are not recovered. of time in which a process or process
mixtures of NGLs that are sold or Non-steam aspirated flare means a unit is utilized; this excludes shutdown,
delivered as undifferentiated product flare where natural gas burns at the tip maintenance, and standby.
from natural gas processing plants. with natural induction of air (and Operating pressure means the
Natural gas processing facilities are relatively lower combustion efficiency containment pressure that characterizes
engaged in the extraction of natural gas as may be evidenced by smoke the normal state of gas and/or liquid
liquids from produced natural gas; formation). inside a particular process, pipeline,
fractionation of mixed natural gas Offshore means tidal-affected borders vessel or tank.
liquids to natural gas products; and of the U.S. lands, both state and Federal, Operator means any person who
removal of carbon dioxide, sulfur adjacent to oceans, bays, lakes or other operates or supervises a facility or
compounds, nitrogen, helium, water, normally standing water. supply operation.
and other contaminants. Natural gas Offshore petroleum and natural gas
Organic monitoring device means an
processing facilities also encompass production facilities means any platform
instrument used to indicate the
gathering and boosting stations that structure, floating in the ocean or lake,
concentration level of organic
fixed on ocean or lake bed, or located
include equipment to phase-separate compounds exiting a control device
on artificial islands in the ocean or lake,
natural gas liquids from natural gas, based on a detection principle such as
that houses equipment to extract
dehydrate the natural gas, and transport IR, photoionization, or thermal
hydrocarbons from ocean floor and
the natural gas to transmission pipelines conductivity.
transports it to storage or transport
or to a processing facility. Organic vapor analyzer (OVA) means
vessels or onshore. In addition, offshore
Natural gas products means products an organic monitoring device that uses
production facilities may include
produced for consumers from natural a flame ionization detector to measure
equipment for separation of liquids from
gas processing facilities including, but the concentrations in air of combustible
natural gas components, dehydration of
not limited to, ethane, propane, butane, organic vapors from 9 to 10,000 parts
natural gas, extraction of H2S and CO2
iso-butane, and pentanes-plus. per million sucked into the probe.
from natural gas, crude oil and
Natural gas transmission compression condensate storage tanks, both on the Owner means any person who has
facility means any permanent platform structure and floating storage legal or equitable title to, has a
combination of compressors that move tanks connected to the platform leasehold interest in, or control of a
natural gas at increased pressure from structure by a pipeline, and facility or supply operation.
production fields or natural gas compression or pumping of Oxygenated gasoline means gasoline
processing facilities, in transmission hydrocarbons to vessels or onshore. The which contains a measurable amount of
pipelines, to natural gas distribution facilities under consideration are oxygenate.
pipelines, or into storage facilities. In located in both State administered Oxygenates means substances which,
addition, transmission compressor waters and Mineral Management when added to gasoline increase the
stations may include equipment for Services administered Federal waters. oxygen content of the gasoline. Common
liquids separation, natural gas Offshore platform pipeline fugitive oxygenates are ethanol CH3-CH2OH,
dehydration, and storage of water and emissions means natural gas above the Methyl Tertiary Butl Ether (CH3)3COCH3
hydrocarbon liquids. water line released from piping (MTBE), Ethyl Tertial Butl Ether
NIST means the United States connectors, pipe wall ruptures and (CH3)3COC2H (ETBE), Tertiary Amyl
National Institute of Standards and holes in natural gas and crude oil Methyl Ether (CH3)(2C2H5) COCH3
Technology. pipeline surfaces on offshore production (TAME), Diisopropyl Ether
Nitric acid production line means a facilities. (CH3)2CHOCH(CH3)2 (DIPE), and
series of reactors and absorbers used to Oil/water separator means equipment Methanol CH3OH. Lawful use of any of
produce nitric acid. used to routinely handle oily-water the substances or any combination of
Nitrogen excreted is the nitrogen that streams, including gravity separators or these substances requires that they be
is excreted by livestock in manure and ponds and air flotation systems. ‘‘substantially similar’’ under section
urine. Oil-fired unit means a stationary 211(f)(1) of the Clean Air Act.
Non-crude feedstocks means natural combustion unit that derives more than Pasture/Range/Paddock means the
gas liquids, hydrogen and other 50 percent of its annual heat input from manure from pasture and range grazing
hydrocarbons, and petroleum products the combustion of fuel oil, and the animals is allowed to lie as deposited,
that are input into the atmospheric remainder of its annual heat input from and is not managed.
distillation column or other processing the combustion of natural gas or other Pentanes plus is a mixture of
units in a refinery gaseous fuels. hydrocarbons, mostly pentanes and
Non-pneumatic pump means any Open-ended line fugitive emissions heavier, extracted from natural gas.
pump that is not pneumatically means natural gas released from pipes Pentanes plus includes isopentane,
powered with pressurized gas of any or valves open on one end to the natural gasoline, and plant condensate.
type, such as natural gas, air, or atmosphere that are intended to Perfluorocarbons or PFCs means a
nitrogen. periodically vent or drain natural gas to class of greenhouse gases consisting on
Non-pneumatic pump fugitive the atmosphere but may also leak the molecular level of carbon and
emissions means natural gas released process gas or liquid through fluorine.
through connectors and flanges of incomplete valve closure including Petrochemical means methanol,
electric motor or engine driven pumps. valve seat obstructions or damage. acrylonitrile, ethylene, ethylene oxide,
ethylene dichloride, and any form of circumvent the portable residence time kind of electronics manufacturing
carbon black. requirements of this definition. process, i.e., etching, cleaning, or
Petrochemical feedstocks means Post-coal mining activities means the chemical vapor deposition using N2O.
feedstocks derived from petroleum for storage, processing, and transport of Process gas means any gas generated
the manufacture of chemicals, synthetic extracted coal. by an industrial process such as
rubber, and a variety of plastics. This Poultry manure with litter is similar to petroleum refining.
category is usually divided into naphtha cattle and swine deep bedding except Processing facility fugitive emissions
less than 401 °F and other oils greater usually not combined with a dry lot or means natural gas released from all
than 401 °F. pasture. Typically used for all poultry components including valves, flanges,
Petroleum means oil removed from breeder flocks and for the production of connectors, open-ended lines, pump
the earth and the oil derived from tar meat type chickens (broiler) and other seals, ESD (emergency shut-down)
sands and shale. fowl. system fugitive emissions, packing and
Petroleum coke means a black solid Poultry manure without litter systems gaskets in natural gas processing
residue, obtained mainly by cracking may manage manure in a liquid form, facilities. This does not include fugitive
and carbonizing of petroleum derived similar to open pits in enclosed animal emissions from equipment and
feedstocks, vacuum bottoms, tar and confinement facilities. These systems components reported elsewhere for this
pitches in processes such as delayed may alternatively be designed and rule, such as compressor fugitive
coking or fluid coking. It consists operated to dry manure as it emissions; acid gas removal, blowdown,
mainly of carbon (90 to 95 percent) and accumulates. The latter is known as a wet seal oil degassing, and dehydrator
has low ash content. It is used as a high-rise manure management system vents; and flare stacks.
feedstock in coke ovens for the steel and is a form of passive windrow Production process unit means
industry, for heating purposes, for manure composting when designed and equipment used to capture a carbon
electrode manufacture and for operated properly. dioxide stream.
production of chemicals. Precision of a measurement at a Propane means the normally gaseous
Petroleum product means all refined specified level (e.g., one percent of full paraffinic compound (C3H8), which
and semi-refined products that are scale) means that 95 percent of repeat includes all products covered by
produced at a refinery by processing measurements made by a device or Natural Gas Policy Act Specifications
crude oil and other petroleum-based technique fall within the range bounded for commercial and HD–5 propane and
feedstocks, including petroleum by the mean of the measurements plus ASTM Specification D 1835. It excludes
products derived from co-processing or minus the specified level. feedstock propanes, which are propanes
biomass and petroleum feedstock Pressed and blown glass means glass not classified as consumer grade
together. Petroleum products may be which is pressed, blown, or both, into propanes, including the propane portion
combusted for energy use, or they may products such as light bulbs, glass fiber, of any natural gas liquid mixes, i.e.,
be used either for non-energy processes technical glass, and other products butane-propane mix.
or as non-energy products. The listed in NAICS 327212. Propylene (C3H6) is an olefinic
definition of petroleum product for Pressure relief device or pressure hydrocarbon recovered from refinery
importers and exporters excludes relief valve or pressure safety valve processes or petrochemical processes.
asphalt and road oil, lubricants, waxes, means a safety device used to prevent Pulp Mill Lime kiln means the
plastics, and plastics products. operating pressures from exceeding the combustion units (e.g., rotary lime kiln
Platform fugitive emissions means maximum allowable working pressure or fluidized bed calciner) used at a kraft
natural gas released from equipment of the process equipment. A common or soda pulp mill to calcine lime mud,
and equipment components including pressure relief device includes, but is which consists primarily of calcium
valves, pressure relief valves, not limited to, a spring-loaded pressure carbonate, into quicklime, which is
connectors, tube fittings, open-ended relief valve. Devices that are actuated calcium oxide.
lines, ports, and hatches. This does not either by a pressure of less than or equal Pump seals means any seal on a pump
include fugitive emissions from to 2.5 psig or by a vacuum are not drive shaft used to keep methane and/
equipment and components reported pressure relief devices. or carbon dioxide containing light
elsewhere for this rule. Primary product means the product of liquids from escaping the inside of a
Portable means designed and capable a process that is produced in greater pump case to the atmosphere.
of being carried or moved from one mass quantity than any other product of Pump seal fugitive emissions means
location to another. Indications of the process. natural gas released from the seal face
portability include but are not limited to Process emissions means the between the pump internal chamber and
wheels, skids, carrying handles, dolly, emissions from industrial processes the atmosphere.
trailer, or platform. Equipment is not (e.g., cement production, ammonia Pushing means the process of
portable if: production) involving chemical or removing the coke from the coke oven
(1) The equipment is attached to a physical transformations other than fuel at the end of the coking cycle. Pushing
foundation. combustion. For example, the begins when coke first begins to fall
(2) The equipment or a replacement calcination of carbonates in a kiln from the oven into the quench car and
resides at the same location for more during cement production or the ends when the quench car enters the
than 12 consecutive months. oxidation of methane in an ammonia quench tower.
(3) The equipment is located at a process results in the release of process Raw mill means a ball and tube mill,
seasonal facility and operates during the CO2 emissions to the atmosphere. vertical roller mill or other size
full annual operating period of the Emissions from fuel combustion to reduction equipment, that is not part of
seasonal facility, remains at the facility provide process heat are not part of an in-line kiln/raw mill, used to grind
for at least two years, and operates at process emissions, whether the feed to the appropriate size. Moisture
that facility for at least three months combustion is internal or external to the may be added or removed from the feed
each year. process equipment. during the grinding operation. If the raw
(4) The equipment is moved from one Process Type, for purposes of mill is used to remove moisture from
location to another in an attempt to electronics manufacturing, means the feed materials, it is also, by definition,
a raw material dryer. The raw mill also Bunker C and is used for the production Smelting furnace means a furnace in
includes the air separator associated of electric power, space heating, vessel which lead-bearing materials, carbon-
with the raw mill. bunkering and various industrial containing reducing agents, and fluxes
RBOB (reformulated gasoline for purposes. are melted together to form a molten
oxygenate blending) means a petroleum Residue gas means natural gas from mass of material containing lead and
product which, when blended with a which natural gas processing facilities slag.
specified type and percentage of liquid products and, in some cases, non- Solid storage is the storage of manure,
oxygenate, meets the definition of hydrocarbon components have been typically for a period of several months,
reformulated gasoline. extracted. in unconfined piles or stacks. Manure is
Reciprocating compressor means a Rotameter means a flow meter in able to be stacked due to the presence
piece of equipment that increases the which gas flow rate upward through a of a sufficient amount of bedding
pressure of a process natural gas by tapered tube lifts a ‘‘float bob’’ to an material or loss of moisture by
positive displacement, employing linear elevation related to the gas flow rate evaporation.
movement of a shaft driving a piston in indicated by etched calibrations on the Sour natural gas means natural gas
a cylinder. wall of the tapered tube. that contains significant concentrations
Reciprocating compressor rod packing Rotary lime kiln means a unit with an of hydrogen sulfide and/or carbon
means a series of flexible rings in inclined rotating drum that is used to dioxide that exceed the concentrations
machined metal cups that fit around the produce a lime product from limestone specified for commercially saleable
reciprocating compressor piston rod to by calcination. natural gas delivered from transmission
create a seal limiting the amount of Semi-refined petroleum product and distribution pipelines.
compressed natural gas that escapes to means all oils requiring further Special naphthas means all finished
the atmosphere. processing. Included in this category are products with the naphtha boiling range
Reciprocating compressor rod packing unfinished oils which are produced by (290° to 470 °F) that are used as paint
fugitive emissions means natural gas the partial refining of crude oil and thinners, cleaners or solvents.
released from a connected tubing vent include the following: naphthas and Spent liquor solids means the dry
and/or around a piston rod where it lighter oils; kerosene and light gas oils; weight of the solids in the spent pulping
passes through the rod packing case. It heavy gas oils; and residuum, and all liquor that enters the chemical recovery
also includes emissions from uncovered products that require further processing furnace or chemical recovery
distance piece, rod packing flange (on or the addition of blendstocks. combustion unit.
each cylinder), any packing vents, cover Spent pulping liquor means the
Sensor means a device that measures
plates (on each cylinder), and the residual liquid collected from on-site
a physical quantity/quality or the
crankcase breather cap. pulping operations at chemical pulp
change in a physical quantity/quality,
Re-condenser means heat exchangers facilities that is subsequently fired in
such as temperature, pressure, flow rate,
that cool compressed boil-off gas to a chemical recovery furnaces at kraft and
pH, or liquid level.
temperature that will condense natural soda pulp facilities or chemical recovery
SF6 means sulfur hexafluoride.
gas to a liquid. combustion units at sulfite or semi-
Refined petroleum product means Shutdown means the cessation of
chemical pulp facilities.
petroleum products produced from the operation of an emission source for any Standard conditions or standard
processing of crude oil, lease purpose. temperature and pressure (STP) means
condensate, natural gas and other Silicon carbide means an artificial 60 degrees Fahrenheit and 14.7 pounds
hydrocarbon compounds abrasive produced from silica sand or per square inch absolute.
Refinery fuel gas (still gas) means any quartz and petroleum coke. Standby means for an equipment to be
gas generated at a petroleum refinery, or Simulation software means a in a state ready for operation, but not
any gas generated by a refinery process calibrated, empirical computer program operating.
unit, that is combusted separately or in that uses physical parameters and Steam aspirated flare means steam
any combination with any type of gas or scientific laws to numerically simulate injected into the flare burner tip to
used as a chemical feedstock. the performance variables of a physical induce air mixing with the hydrocarbon
Reformulated gasoline means any process, outputting such parameters as fuel to promote more complete
gasoline whose formulation has been emission rates from which methane combustion as indicated by lack of
certified under 40 CFR 80.40, and which emissions can be estimated. smoke formation.
meets each of the standards and Sinter process means a process that Steam reforming means a catalytic
requirements prescribed under 40 CFR produces a fused aggregate of fine iron- process that involves a reaction between
80.41. bearing materials suited for use in a natural gas or other light hydrocarbons
Re-gasification means the process of blast furnace. The sinter machine is and steam. The result is a mixture of
vaporizing liquefied natural gas to composed of a continuous traveling hydrogen, carbon monoxide, carbon
gaseous phase natural gas. grate that conveys a bed of ore fines and dioxide, and water.
Research and development process other finely divided iron-bearing Storage station fugitive emissions
unit means a process unit whose material and fuel (typically coke means natural gas released from all
purpose is to conduct research and breeze), a burner at the feed end of the components including valves, flanges,
development for new processes and grate for ignition, and a series of connectors, open-ended lines, pump
products and is not engaged in the downdraft windboxes along the length seals, ESD (emergency shut-down)
manufacture of products for commercial of the strand to support downdraft system emissions, packing and gaskets
sale, except in a de minimis manner. combustion and heat sufficient to in natural gas storage station. This does
Residual fuel oil means a produce a fused sinter product. not include fugitive emissions from
classification for the heavier fuel oils, Site means any combination of one or equipment and equipment components
No. 5 and No. 6. No. 5 is also known more graded pad sites, gravel pad sites, reported elsewhere for this rule.
as Navy Special and is used in steam foundations, platforms, or the Storage tank means other vessel that
powered vessels in government service immediate physical location upon is designed to contain an accumulation
and inshore power plants. No.6 includes which equipment is physically located. of crude oil, condensate, intermediate
hydrocarbon liquids, or produced water concentrations in air of combustible complete combustion of a sample of an
and that is constructed entirely of non- organic vapors from 9 parts per million organic material.
earthen materials (e.g., wood, concrete, and exceeding 10,000 parts per million Uncovered anaerobic lagoons are a
steel, plastic) that provide structural sucked into the probe. type of liquid storage system designed
support. Trace concentrations means and operated to combine waste
Storage tank fugitive emissions means concentrations of less than 0.1 percent stabilization and storage. Lagoon
natural gas vented when it flashes out by mass of the process stream. supernatant is usually used to remove
of liquids; this occurs when liquids are Trained technician means a person manure from the associated
transferred from higher pressure and who has completed a vendor provided confinement facilities to the lagoon.
temperature conditions upstream, plus or equivalent training program and Anaerobic lagoons are designed with
working losses from liquid level demonstrated proficiency to use specific varying lengths of storage (up to a year
increases and decreases during filling equipment for its intended purpose, or greater), depending on the climate
and draining and standing losses such as high volume sampler for the region, the volatile solids loading rate,
(breathing losses) from diurnal purposes of this rule. and other operational factors. The water
temperature changes and barometric Transform means to use and entirely from the lagoon may be recycled as
pressure changes expanding and consume (except for trace flush water or used to irrigate and
contracting the vapor volume of a tank. concentrations) nitrous oxide or fertilize fields.
Storage wellhead fugitive emissions fluorinated GHGs in the manufacturing Underground natural gas storage
means natural gas released from storage of other chemicals for commercial facility means a subsurface facility,
station wellhead components including purposes. Transformation does not including but not limited to depleted
but not limited to valves, OELs, include burning of nitrous oxide. gas or oil reservoirs and salt dome
connectors, flanges, and tube fittings. Transshipment means the continuous caverns, utilized for storing natural gas
Sub-surface or subsurface facility shipment of nitrous oxide or a that has been transferred from its
means for the purposes of this rule, a fluorinated GHG from a foreign state of original location for the primary
natural gas facility, such as a pipeline origin through the United States or its purpose of load balancing, which is the
and metering and regulation station in territories to a second foreign state of process of equalizing the receipt and
a closed vault below the land surface of final destination, as long as the delivery of natural gas. Processes and
the Earth. shipment does not enter into United operations that may be located at a
Sulfur recovery plant means all
States jurisdiction. A transshipment, as natural gas underground storage facility
process units which recover sulfur or
it moves through the United States or its include, but are not limited to,
produce sulfuric acid from hydrogen
territories, cannot be re-packaged, sorted compression, dehydration and flow
sulfide (H2S) and/or sulfur dioxide
or otherwise changed in condition. measurement. The storage facility also
(SO2) at a petroleum refinery. The sulfur
Transmission compressor station includes all the wellheads connected to
recovery plant also includes sulfur pits
fugitive emissions means natural gas the compression units located at the
used to store the recovered sulfur
released from all components including facility.
product, but it does not include
but not limited to valves, flanges, United States means the 50 states, the
secondary sulfur storage vessels
connectors, open-ended lines, pump District of Columbia, and U.S.
downstream of the sulfur pits. For
seals, ESD (emergency shut-down) possessions and territories.
example, a Claus sulfur recovery plant
system emissions, packing and gaskets Unstabilized crude oil means, for the
includes: Reactor furnace and waste
in natural gas transmission compressor purposes of this subpart, crude oil that
heat boiler, catalytic reactors, sulfur
stations. This does not include fugitive is pumped from the well to a pipeline
pits, and, if present, oxidation or
emissions from equipment and or pressurized storage vessel for
reduction control systems, or
equipment components reported transport to the refinery without
incinerator, thermal oxidizer, or similar
elsewhere for this rule, such as intermediate storage in a storage tank at
combustion device.
Supplemental fuel means a fuel compressor fugitive emissions. atmospheric pressures. Unstabilized
burned within a petrochemical process Transmission pipeline means high crude oil is characterized by having a
that is not produced within the process pressure cross country pipeline true vapor pressure of 5 pounds per
itself. transporting saleable quality natural gas square inch absolute (psia) or greater.
Supplier means a producer, importer, from production or natural gas Valve means any device for halting or
or exporter of a fossil fuel or an processing to natural gas distribution regulating the flow of a liquid or gas
industrial greenhouse gas. pressure let-down, metering, regulating through a passage, pipeline, inlet,
Taconite iron ore processing means an stations where the natural gas is outlet, or orifice; including, but not
industrial process that separates and typically odorized before delivery to limited to, gate, globe, plug, ball,
concentrates iron ore from taconite, a customers. butterfly and needle valves.
low grade iron ore, and heats the Trona means the raw material Vapor recovery system means any
taconite in an indurating furnace to (mineral) used to manufacture soda ash; equipment located at the source of
produce taconite pellets that are used as hydrated sodium bicarbonate carbonate potential gas emissions to the
the primary feed material for the (NaCO3.NaHCO3.2H2O). atmosphere or to a flare, that is
production of iron in blast furnaces at Turbine meter means a flow meter in composed of piping, connections, and,
integrated iron and steel plants. which a gas or liquid flow rate through if necessary, flow-inducing devices; and
Tanker unloading means pumping of the calibrated tube spins a turbine from that is used for routing the gas back into
liquid hydrocarbon (e.g., crude oil, which the spin rate is detected and the process as a product and/or fuel.
LNG) from an ocean-going tanker or calibrated to measure the fluid flow rate. Vaporization unit means a process
barge to shore storage tanks. Ultimate analysis means the unit that performs controlled heat input
Toxic vapor analyzer (TVA) means an determination of the percentages of to vaporize liquefied natural gas to
organic monitoring device that uses a carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, sulfur, and supply transmission and distribution
flame ionization detector and chlorine and (by difference) oxygen in pipelines, or consumers with natural
photoionization detector to measure the the gaseous products and ash after the gas.
Ventilation system means a system (a) The following materials are (19) ASTM D4057–06, Standard
deployed within a mine to ensure that available for purchase from the Practice for Manual Sampling of
CH4 levels remain within safe following addresses: American Society Petroleum and Petroleum Products.
concentrations. for Testing and Material (ASTM), 100 (20) ASTM D4809–06, Standard Test
Volatile solids are the organic material Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box CB700, Method for Heat of Combustion of
in livestock manure and consist of both West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania Liquid Hydrocarbon Fuels by Bomb
biodegradable and non-biodegradable 19428–B2959; and the University Calorimeter (Precision Method).
fractions. Microfilms International, 300 North (21) ASTM Specification D4814–08a,
Waelz kiln means an inclined rotary Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106: Standard Specification for Automotive
kiln in which zinc-containing materials (1) ASTM D240–02, (Reapproved Spark-Ignition Engine Fuel.
are charged together with a carbon 2007), Standard Test Method for Heat of (22) ASTM D4891–89 (Reapproved
reducing agent (e.g., petroleum coke, Combustion of Liquid Hydrocarbon 2006), Standard Test Method for
metallurgical coke, or anthracite coal). Fuels by Bomb Calorimeter. Heating Value of Gases in Natural Gas
Waste feedstocks are non-crude (2) ASTM D388–05, Standard Range by Stoichiometric Combustion.
feedstocks that have been contaminated, Classification of Coals by Rank. (23) ASTM D5291–02 (Reapproved
downgraded, or no longer meet the (3) ASTM D396–08, Standard 2007), Standard Test Methods for
specifications of the product category or Specification for Fuel Oils. Instrumental Determination of Carbon,
end-use for which they were intended. (4) ASTM D975–08, Standard Hydrogen, and Nitrogen in Petroleum
Waste feedstocks include but are not Specification for Diesel Fuel Oils. Products and Lubricants.
limited to: Used plastics, used engine (5) ASTM D1250–07, Standard Guide (24) ASTM D5373–08, Standard Test
oils, used dry cleaning solvents, and for Use of the Petroleum Measurement Methods for Instrumental Determination
trans-mix (mix of products at the Tables. of Carbon, Hydrogen, and Nitrogen in
interface in delivery pipelines). (6) ASTM D1826–94 (Reapproved Laboratory Samples of Coal and Coke.
2003), Standard Test Method for (25) ASTM D5865–07a, Standard Test
Waxes means a solid or semi-solid
Calorific (Heating) Value of Gases in Method for Gross Calorific Value of Coal
material at 77 °F consisting of a mixture
Natural Gas Range by Continuous and Coke.
of hydrocarbons obtained or derived
Recording Calorimeter. (26) ASTM D6316–04, Standard Test
from petroleum fractions, or through a
(7) ASTM Specification D1835–05 Method for the Determination of Total,
Fischer-Tropsch type process, in which
(2005). Combustible and Carbonate Carbon in
the straight chained paraffin series (8) ASTM D1945–03 (Reapproved Solid Residues from Coal and Coke.
predominates. 2006), Standard Test Method for (27) ASTM D6866–06a, Standard Test
Wellhead means the piping, casing, Analysis of Natural Gas by Gas Methods for Determining the Biobased
tubing and connected valves protruding Chromatography. Content of Natural Range Materials
above the Earth’s surface for an oil and/ (9) ASTM D1946–90 (Reapproved Using Radiocarbon and Isotope Ratio
or natural gas well. The wellhead ends 2006), Standard Practice for Analysis of Mass Spectrometry Analysis.
where the flow line connects to a Reformed Gas by Gas Chromatography. (28) ASTM E1019–03, Standard Test
wellhead valve. (10) ASTM D2013–07, Standard Methods for Determination of Carbon,
Wet natural gas means natural gas in Practice of Preparing Coal Samples for Sulfur, Nitrogen, and Oxygen in Steel
which water vapor exceeds the Analysis. and in Iron, Nickel, and Cobalt Alloys.
concentration specified for (11) ASTM D2234/D2234M–07, (29) ASTM E1915–07a, Standard Test
commercially saleable natural gas Standard Practice for Collection of a Methods for Analysis of Metal Bearing
delivered from transmission and Gross Sample of Coal. Ores and Related Materials by
distribution pipelines. This input (12) ASTM D2502–04 (Reapproved Combustion Infrared-Absorption
stream to a natural gas dehydrator is 2002), Standard Test Method for Spectrometry.
referred to as ‘‘wet gas’’. Estimation of Molecular Weight (30) ASTM CS–104 (1985), Carbon
Wool fiberglass means fibrous glass of (Relative Molecular Mass) of Petroleum Steel of Medium Carbon Content.
random texture, including fiberglass Oils from Viscosity Measurements. (31) ASTM D 7459–08, Standard
insulation, and other products listed in (13) ASTM D2503–92 (Reapproved Practice for Collection of Integrated
NAICS 327993. 2007), Standard Test Method for Samples for the Speciation of Biomass
You means the owner or operator Relative Molecular Mass (Relative (Biogenic) and Fossil-Derived Carbon
subject to Part 98. Molecular Weight) of Hydrocarbons by Dioxide Emitted from Stationary
Zinc smelters means a facility engaged Thermoelectric Measurement of Vapor Emissions Sources.
in the production of zinc metal, zinc Pressure. (32) ASTM D6060–96(2001) Standard
oxide, or zinc alloy products from zinc (14) ASTM D2880–03, Standard Practice for Sampling of Process Vents
sulfide ore concentrates, zinc calcine, or Specification for Gas Turbine Fuel Oils. With a Portable Gas Chromatograph.
zinc-bearing scrap and recycled (15) ASTM D3176–89 (Reapproved (33) ASTM D 2502–88(2004)e1
materials through the use of 2002), Standard Practice for Ultimate Standard Test Method for Ethylene,
pyrometallurgical techniques involving Analysis of Coal and Coke. Other Hydrocarbons, and Carbon
the reduction and volatization of zinc- (16) ASTM D3238–95 (Reapproved Dioxide in High-Purity Ethylene by Gas
bearing feed materials charged to a 2005), Standard Test Method for Chromatography.
furnace. Calculation of Carbon Distribution and (34) ASTM C25–06 Standard Test
Structural Group Analysis of Petroleum Method for Chemical Analysis of
§ 98.7 What standardized methods are Oils by the n-d-M Method. Limestone, quicklime, and Hydrated
incorporated by reference into this part? (17) ASTM D3588–98 (Reapproved Lime.
The materials listed in this section are 2003), Standard Practice for Calculating (35) UOP539–97 Refinery Gas
incorporated by reference for use in this Heat Value, Compressibility Factor, and Analysis by Gas Chromatography.
part and are incorporated as they Relative Density of Gaseous Fuels. (b) The following materials are
existed on the date of approval of this (18) ASTM Specification D3699–07, available for purchase from the
part. Standard Specification for Kerosene. American Society of Mechanical
Engineers (ASME), 22 Law Drive, P.O. Relative Density and Compressibility (2) Shop Testing of Automatic Liquid
Box 2900, Fairfield, NJ 07007–2900: Factor for Natural Gas Mixtures from Level Gages, Bulletin 2509 B, December
(1) ASME MFC–3M–2004, Compositional Analysis. 1961 (Reaffirmed August 1987, October
Measurement of Fluid Flow in Pipes (2) GPA Standard 2261–00, Analysis 1992).
Using Orifice, Nozzle, and Venturi. for Natural Gas and Similar Gaseous (3) American Petroleum Institute
(2) ASME MFC–4M–1986 (Reaffirmed Mixtures by Gas Chromatography. (API) Manual of Petroleum
1997), Measurement of Gas Flow by (e) The following American Gas Measurement Standards, Chapter 4—
Turbine Meters. Association materials are available for Proving Systems:
(3) ASME-MFC–5M–1985, purchase from the following address: ILI (i) Section 2—Displacement Provers,
(Reaffirmed 1994), Measurement of Infodisk, 610 Winters Avenue, Paramus, Third Edition, September 2003.
Liquid Flow in Closed Conduits Using New Jersey 07652:
(ii) Section 5—Master-Meter Provers,
Transit-Time Ultrasonic Flowmeters. (1) American Gas Association Report
Second Edition, May 2000 (Reaffirmed,
(4) ASME MFC–6M–1998, No. 3: Orifice Metering of Natural Gas,
August 2005).
Measurement of Fluid Flow in Pipes Part 1: General Equations and
Using Vortex Flowmeters. Uncertainty Guidelines (1990), Part 2: (4) American Petroleum Institute
(5) ASME MFC–7M–1987 (Reaffirmed Specification and Installation (API) Manual of Petroleum
1992), Measurement of Gas Flow by Requirements (1990). Measurement Standards, Chapter 22—
Means of Critical Flow Venturi Nozzles. (2) American Gas Association Testing Protocol, Section 2—Differential
(6) ASME MFC–9M–1988 (Reaffirmed Transmission Measurement Committee Pressure Flow Measurement Devices,
2001), Measurement of Liquid Flow in Report No. 7: Measurement of Gas by First Edition, August 2005.
Closed Conduits by Weighing Method. Turbine Meters (2006). (g) The following material is available
(c) The following materials are (f) The following materials are for purchase from the following address:
available for purchase from the available for purchase from the American Society of Heating,
American National Standards Institute following address: American Petroleum Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning
(ANSI), 25 West 43rd Street, Fourth Institute, Publications Department, 1220 Engineers, Inc., 1791 Tullie Circle, NE.,
Floor, New York, New York 10036: L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005– Atlanta, Georgia 30329.
(1) ISO 8316: 1987 Measurement of 4070: (1) ASHRAE 41.8–1989: Standard
Liquid Flow in Closed Conduits— (1) American Petroleum Institute Methods of Measurement of Flow of
Method by Collection of the Liquid in (API) Manual of Petroleum Liquids in Pipes Using Orifice
a Volumetric Tank. Measurement Standards, Chapter 3— Flowmeters.
(2) ISO/TR 15349–1:1998, Unalloyed Tank Gauging:
steel—Determination of low carbon (i) Section 1A, Standard Practice for § 98.8 What are the compliance and
the Manual Gauging of Petroleum and enforcement provisions of this part?
content. Part 1: Infrared absorption
method after combustion in an electric Petroleum Products, Second Edition, Any violation of the requirements of
resistance furnace (by peak separation). August 2005. this part shall be a violation of the Clean
(3) ISO/TR 15349–3: 1998, Unalloyed (ii) Section 1B—Standard Practice for Air Act. A violation includes, but is not
steel—Determination of low carbon Level Measurement of Liquid limited to, failure to report GHG
content. Part 3: Infrared absorption Hydrocarbons in Stationary Tanks by emissions, failure to collect data needed
method after combustion in an electric Automatic Tank Gauging, Second to calculate GHG emissions, failure to
resistance furnace (with preheating). Edition June 2001 (Reaffirmed, October continuously monitor and test as
(d) The following materials are 2006). required, failure to retain records
available for purchase from the (iii) Section 3—Standard Practice for needed to verify the amount of GHG
following address: Gas Processors Level Measurement of Liquid emission, and failure to calculate GHG
Association (GPA), 6526 East 60th Hydrocarbons in Stationary Pressurized emissions following the methodologies
Street, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74143: Storage Tanks by Automatic Tank specified in this part. Each day of a
(1) GPA Standard 2172–96, Gauging, First Edition June 1996 violation constitutes a separate
Calculation of Gross Heating Value, (Reaffirmed, October 2006). violation.
TABLE A–1 OF SUBPART A—GLOBAL WARMING POTENTIALS (100-YEAR TIME HORIZON)

Global warm-
Name CAS No. Chemical formula ing potential
(100 yr.)
Carbon dioxide .............................................................. 124–38–9 CO2 ............................................................................... 1

Methane ........................................................................ 74–82–8 CH4 ............................................................................... 21
Nitrous oxide ................................................................. 10024–97–2 N2O ............................................................................... 310
HFC-23 .......................................................................... 75–46–7 CHF3 ............................................................................. 11,700
HFC-32 .......................................................................... 75–10–5 CH2F2 ........................................................................... 650
HFC-41 .......................................................................... 593–53–3 CH3F ............................................................................. 150
HFC-125 ........................................................................ 354–33–6 C2HF5 ........................................................................... 2,800
HFC-134 ........................................................................ 359–35–3 C2H2F4 .......................................................................... 1,000
HFC-134a ...................................................................... 811–97–2 CH2FCF3 ...................................................................... 1,300
HFC-143 ........................................................................ 430–66–0 C2H3F3 .......................................................................... 300
HFC-143a ...................................................................... 420–46–2 C2H3F3 .......................................................................... 3,800
HFC-152 ........................................................................ 624–72–6 CH2FCH2F .................................................................... 53
HFC-152a ...................................................................... 75–37–6 CH3CHF2 ...................................................................... 140
HFC-161 ........................................................................ 353–36–6 CH3CH2F ...................................................................... 12
HFC-227ea .................................................................... 431–89–0 C3HF7 ........................................................................... 2,900
HFC-236cb .................................................................... 677–56–5 CH2FCF2CF3 ................................................................ 1,340
HFC-236ea .................................................................... 431–63–0 CHF2CHFCF3 ............................................................... 1,370
TABLE A–1 OF SUBPART A—GLOBAL WARMING POTENTIALS (100-YEAR TIME HORIZON)—Continued

Global warm-
Name CAS No. Chemical formula ing potential
(100 yr.)
HFC-236fa ..................................................................... 690–39–1 C3H2F6 .......................................................................... 6,300

HFC-245ca .................................................................... 679–86–7 C3H3F5 .......................................................................... 560
HFC-245fa ..................................................................... 460–73–1 CHF2CH2CF3 ................................................................ 1,030
HFC-365mfc .................................................................. 406–58–6 CH3CF2CH2CF3 ............................................................ 794
HFC-43-10mee ............................................................. 138495–42–8 CF3CFHCFHCF2CF3 .................................................... 1,300
Sulfur hexafluoride ........................................................ 2551–62–4 SF6 ............................................................................... 23,900
Trifluoromethyl sulphur pentafluoride ........................... 373–80–8 SF5CF3 ......................................................................... 17,700
Nitrogen trifluoride ......................................................... 7783–54–2 NF3 ............................................................................... 17,200
PFC-14 (Perfluoromethane) .......................................... 75–73–0 CF4 ............................................................................... 6,500
PFC-116 (Perfluoroethane) ........................................... 76–16–4 C2F6 .............................................................................. 9,200
PFC-218 (Perfluoropropane) ........................................ 76–19–7 C3F8 .............................................................................. 7,000
Perfluorocyclopropane .................................................. 931–91–9 c-C3F6 ........................................................................... 17,340
PFC-3-1-10 (Perfluorobutane) ...................................... 355–25–9 C4F10 ............................................................................ 7,000
Perfluorocyclobutane .................................................... 115–25–3 c-C4F8 ........................................................................... 8,700
PFC-4-1-12 (Perfluoropentane) .................................... 678–26–2 C5F12 ............................................................................ 7,500
PFC-5-1-14 (Perfluorohexane) ..................................... 355–42–0 C6F14 ............................................................................ 7,400
PFC-9-1-18 ................................................................... 306–94–5 C10F18 ........................................................................... 7,500
HCFE-235da2 (Isoflurane) ............................................ 26675–46–7 CHF2OCHClCF3 ........................................................... 350
HFE-43-10pccc (H-Galden 1040x) ............................... NA CHF2OCF2OC2F4OCHF2 .............................................. 1,870
HFE-125 ........................................................................ 3822–68–2 CHF2OCF3 .................................................................... 14,900
HFE-134 ........................................................................ 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) .................................................. NA 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 ................................................................... NA 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 ............................................................... 67490–36–2 CF3CF2OCF2CHF2 ....................................................... 919
HFE-338mcf2 ................................................................ 156–05–3 CF3CF2OCH2CF3 ......................................................... 552
HFE-338pcc13 (HG-01) ................................................ NA CHF2OCF2CF2OCHF2 .................................................. 1,500
HFE-347mcc3 ............................................................... 28523–86–6 CH3OCF2CF2CF3 ......................................................... 575
HFE-347mcf2 ................................................................ NA CF3CF2OCH2CHF2 ....................................................... 374
HFE-347pcf2 ................................................................. 406–78–0 CHF2CF2OCH2CF3 ....................................................... 580
HFE-356mec3 ............................................................... 382–34–3 CH3OCF2CHFCF3 ........................................................ 101
HFE-356pcc3 ................................................................ NA CH3OCF2CF2CHF2 ....................................................... 110
HFE-356pcf2 ................................................................. NA CHF2CH2OCF2CHF2 .................................................... 265
HFE-356pcf3 ................................................................. 35042–99–0 CHF2OCH2CF2CHF2 .................................................... 502
HFE-365mcf3 ................................................................ NA CF3CF2CH2OCH3 ......................................................... 11
HFE-374pc2 .................................................................. 512–51–6 CH3CH2OCF2CHF2 ...................................................... 557
HFE-449sl (HFE-7100) Chemical blend ....................... 163702–07–6 C4F9OCH3 .................................................................... 297
163702–08–7 (CF3)2CFCF2OCH3.
HFE-569sf2 (HFE-7200) Chemical blend ..................... 163702–05–4 C4F9OC2H5 ................................................................... 59
163702–06–5 (CF3)2CFCF2OC2H5.
Sevoflurane ................................................................... 28523–86–6 CH2FOCH(CF3)2 ........................................................... 345
NA ................................................................................. 13171–18–1 (CF3)2CHOCH3 ............................................................. 27
NA ................................................................................. 26103–08–2 CHF2OCH(CF3)2 ........................................................... 380
NA ................................................................................. NA -(CF2)4CH(OH)- ............................................................ 73
NA ................................................................................. NA CH3OCF(CF3)2 ............................................................. 343
NA ................................................................................. NA (CF3)2CHOH ................................................................. 195
NA ................................................................................. NA CF3CF2CH2OH ............................................................. 42
PFPMIE ......................................................................... NA CF3OCF(CF3)CF2OCF2OCF3 ....................................... 10,300
NA = not available.
TABLE A–2 OF SUBPART A—UNITS OF MEASURE CONVERSIONS

To convert from To Multiply by
Kilograms (kg) .................................................................. Pounds (lbs) ..................................................................... 2.20462.

Pounds (lbs) ..................................................................... Kilograms (kg) .................................................................. 0.45359.
Pounds (lbs) ..................................................................... Metric tons ....................................................................... 4.53592 × 10¥4.
Short tons ......................................................................... Pounds (lbs) ..................................................................... 2,000.
Short tons ......................................................................... Metric tons ....................................................................... 0.90718.
Metric tons ........................................................................ Short tons ......................................................................... 1.10231.
Metric tons ........................................................................ Kilograms (kg) .................................................................. 1,000.
Cubic meters (m3) ............................................................ Cubic feet (ft3) .................................................................. 35.31467.
TABLE A–2 OF SUBPART A—UNITS OF MEASURE CONVERSIONS—Continued

To convert from To Multiply by
Cubic feet (ft3) .................................................................. Cubic meters (m3) ............................................................ 0.028317.

Gallons (liquid, US) .......................................................... Liters (l) ............................................................................ 3.78541.
Liters (l) ............................................................................ Gallons (liquid, US) .......................................................... 0.26417.
Barrels of Liquid Fuel (bbl) .............................................. Cubic meters (m3) ............................................................ 0.15891.
Cubic meters (m3) ............................................................ Barrels of Liquid Fuel (bbl) .............................................. 6.289.
Barrels of Liquid Fuel (bbl) .............................................. Gallons (liquid, US) .......................................................... 42.
Gallons (liquid, US) .......................................................... Barrels of Liquid Fuel (bbl) .............................................. 0.023810.
Gallons (liquid, US) .......................................................... Cubic meters (m3) ............................................................ 0.0037854.
Liters (l) ............................................................................ Cubic meters (m3) ............................................................ 0.001.
Feet (ft) ............................................................................. Meters (m) ........................................................................ 0.3048.
Meters (m) ........................................................................ Feet (ft) ............................................................................ 3.28084.
Miles (mi) .......................................................................... Kilometers (km) ................................................................ 1.60934.
Kilometers (km) ................................................................ Miles (mi) ......................................................................... 0.62137.
Square feet (ft2) ............................................................... Acres ................................................................................ 2.29568 × 10¥5.
Square meters (m2) ......................................................... Acres ................................................................................ 2.47105 × 10¥4.
Square miles (mi2) ........................................................... Square kilometers (km2) .................................................. 2.58999.
Degrees Celsius (°C) ....................................................... Degrees Fahrenheit (°F) .................................................. °C = (5/9) × (°F¥32).
Degrees Fahrenheit (°F) .................................................. Degrees Celsius (°C) ....................................................... °F = (9/5) × °C + 32.
Degrees Celsius (°C) ....................................................... Kelvin (K) ......................................................................... K = °C + 273.15.
Kelvin (K) .......................................................................... Degrees Rankine (°R) ...................................................... 1.8.
Joules ............................................................................... Btu .................................................................................... 9.47817 × 10¥4.
Btu .................................................................................... MMBtu .............................................................................. 1 × 10¥6.
Pascals (Pa) ..................................................................... Inches of Mercury (in Hg) ................................................ 2.95334 × 10¥4.
Inches of Mercury (inHg) ................................................. Pounds per square inch (psi) .......................................... 0.49110.
Pounds per square inch (psi) ........................................... Inches of Mercury (in Hg) ................................................ 2.03625.
Subpart B—[Reserved] by a state or local air pollution control calculation methods for Acid Rain
agency. Program units are addressed in subpart
Subpart C—General Stationary Fuel D of this part.
§ 98.31 Reporting threshold.
Combustion Sources (a) CO2 emissions from fuel
You must report GHG emissions
§ 98.30 Definition of the source category. under this subpart if your facility combustion. For each stationary fuel
contains one or more stationary combustion unit, the owner or operator
(a) Stationary fuel combustion sources
combustion sources and the facility shall use the four-tiered approach in
are devices that combust solid, liquid,
meets the requirements of either this paragraph, subject to the
or gaseous fuel, generally for the
§ 98.2(a)(1), (2), or (3). conditions, requirements, and
purposes of producing electricity,
restrictions set forth in paragraph (b) of
generating steam, or providing useful § 98.32 GHGs to report.
heat or energy for industrial, this section.
You must report CO2, CH4, and N2O
commercial, or institutional use, or (1) Tier 1 Calculation Methodology.
mass emissions from each stationary
reducing the volume of waste by Calculate the annual CO2 mass
fuel combustion unit.
removing combustible matter. emissions for a particular type of fuel
Stationary fuel combustion sources § 98.33 Calculating GHG emissions. combusted in a unit, by substituting a
include, but are not limited to, boilers, The owner or operator shall use the fuel-specific default CO2 emission factor
combustion turbines, engines, methodologies in this section to (from Table C–1 of this subpart), a
incinerators, and process heaters. calculate the GHG emissions from default high heating value (from Table
(b) This source category does not stationary fuel combustion sources, C–1 of this subpart), and the annual fuel
include portable equipment or except for electricity generating units consumption (from company records
generating units designated as that are subject to the Acid Rain kept as provided in this rule) into the
emergency generators in a permit issued Program. The GHG emissions Equation C–1 of this section:
CO2 = 1 x 10−3 ∗ Fuel ∗ HHV ∗ EF (Eq. C-1)
Where: per mass or mmBtu per volume, as combusted in a unit, by substituting

CO2 = Annual CO2 mass emissions for the applicable). measured high heat values, a default
specific fuel type (metric tons). EF = Fuel-specific default CO2 emission CO2 emission factor (from Table C–1 or
factor, from Table C–1 of this subpart (kg Table C–2 of this subpart), and the
Fuel = Mass or volume of fuel combusted per
CO2/mmBtu).
year, from company records (express 1 x 10¥3 = Conversion factor from kilograms
quantity of fuel combusted (from
mass in short tons for solid fuel, volume to metric tons. company records kept as provided in
in standard cubic feet for gaseous fuel, this rule) into the following equations:
and volume in gallons for liquid fuel). (2) Tier 2 Calculation Methodology. (i) Equation C–2a of this section
HHV = Default high heat value of the fuel, Calculate the annual CO2 mass applies to any type of fuel, except for
from Table C–1 of this subpart (mmBtu emissions for a particular type of fuel municipal solid waste (MSW):
EP10AP09.002</GPH>
n
CO2 = ∑1 x 10−3 ( Fuel ) p ∗ ( HHV ) p ∗ EF (Eq. C-2a)
p =1
Where: p = Measurement period (month). (ii) In Equation C–2a of this section,

CO2 = Annual CO2 mass emissions for a (HHV)p = High heat value of the fuel for the the value of ‘‘n’’ depends upon the
specific fuel type (metric tons). measurement period (mmBtu per mass or frequency at which high heat value
n = Number of required heat content volume). (HHV) measurements are required under
measurements for the year. EF = Fuel-specific default CO2 emission § 98.34(c). For example, for natural gas,
(Fuel)p = Mass or volume of the fuel factor, from Table C–1 or C–2 of this which requires monthly sampling and
combusted during the measurement subpart (kg CO2/mmBtu).
period ‘‘p’’ (express mass in short tons
analysis, n = 6 if the unit combusts
1 x 10¥3 = Conversion factor from kilograms natural gas in only 6 months of the year.
for solid fuel, volume in standard cubic
to metric tons. (iii) For MSW combustion, use
feet for gaseous fuel, and volume in
gallons for liquid fuel). Equation C–2b of this section:
CO2 = 1 x 10−3 ( Steam) ( B) ( EF ) (Eq. C-2b)
Where: 1 x 10¥3 = Conversion factor from kilograms the amount of fuel combusted is
CO2 = Annual CO2 mass emissions from to metric tons. obtained from company records kept as
MSW combustion (metric tons). provided in this rule. For liquid and
Steam = Total mass of steam generated by (3) Tier 3 Calculation Methodology.
gaseous fuels, the volume of fuel
MSW combustion during the reporting Calculate the annual CO2 mass
year (lb steam). combusted is measured directly, using
emissions for a particular type of fuel
B = Ratio of the boiler’s maximum rated heat fuel flow meters (including gas billing
combusted in a unit, by substituting
input capacity to its design rated steam meters). For fuel oil, tank drop
output capacity (mmBtu/lb steam).
measurements of fuel carbon content,
measurements may also be used.
EF = Default CO2 emission factor for MSW, molecular weight (gaseous fuels, only),
from Table C–3 of this subpart (kg CO2/ and the quantity of fuel combusted into (i) For a solid fuel, use Equation
mmBtu). the following Equations. For solid fuels, C–3 of this section:
n
44
CO2 = ∑ ∗ (Fuel ) n ∗ (CC ) n (Eq. C-3)
p =1 12
Where: (Fuel)n = Mass of the solid fuel combusted in (percent by weight, expressed as a
CO2 = Annual CO2 mass emissions from the month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons). decimal fraction, e.g., 95% = 0.95).
combustion of the specific solid fuel P = Measurement period (month). 44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to
(CC)n = Carbon content of the solid fuel, from carbon.
(metric tons).
N = Number of required carbon content the fuel analysis results for month ‘‘n’’ (ii) For a liquid fuel, use Equation
determinations for the year. C–4 of this section:
n
44
CO2 = ∑ ∗ (Fuel ) n ∗ (CC ) n ∗ 0.001 (Eq. C-4)
p =1 12
EP10AP09.007</GPH>
Where: (Fuel)n = Volume of the liquid fuel 44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to
CO2 = Annual CO2 mass emissions from the combusted in month ‘‘n’’ (gallons). carbon.
combustion of the specific liquid fuel P = Measurement period (month). 0.001 = Conversion factor from kg to metric
(CC)n = Carbon content of the liquid fuel, tons. EP10AP09.006</GPH>
(metric tons).
N = Number of required carbon content from the fuel analysis results for month (iii) For a gaseous fuel, use Equation
determinations for the year. ‘‘n’’ (kg C per gallon of fuel). C–5 of this section:
EP10AP09.005</GPH>
n
44 MW
CO2 = ∑ ∗ (Fuel ) n ∗ (CC ) n ∗ ∗ 0.001 (Eq. C-5)
p =1 12 MVC
EP10AP09.004</GPH>
Where: N = Number of required carbon content and (Fuel)n = Volume of the gaseous fuel
CO2 = Annual CO2 mass emissions from molecular weight determinations for the combusted on day ‘‘n’’ or in month ‘‘n’’,
combustion of the specific gaseous fuel year. as applicable (scf).
(metric tons). P = Measurement period (month or day, as
applicable).
EP10AP09.003</GPH>
(CC)n = Average carbon content of the for those months in which natural gas continuous emission monitoring
gaseous fuel, from the fuel analysis is combusted during the reporting year. systems (CEMS).
results for the day or month, as For the combustion of other gaseous (i) This methodology requires a CO2
applicable (kg C per kg of fuel). fuels (e.g., refinery gas or process gas), concentration monitor and a stack gas
MW = Molecular weight of the gaseous fuel,
from fuel analysis (kg/kg-mole).
the CO2 mass emissions are calculated volumetric flow rate monitor, except as
MVC = Molar volume conversion factor only for those days on which the otherwise provided in paragraph
(849.5 scf per kg-mole at standard gaseous fuel is combusted during the (a)(1)(iv)(D) of this section. Hourly
conditions). reporting year. For example, if the unit measurements of CO2 concentration and
44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to combusts process gas on 250 of the 365 stack gas flow rate are converted to CO2
carbon. days in the year, then n = 250 in mass emission rates in metric tons per
0.001 = Conversion factor from kg to metric Equation C–5 of this section. hour.
tons. (4) Tier 4 Calculation Methodology. (ii) When the CO2 concentration is
(iv) In applying Equation C–5 of this Calculate the annual CO2 mass measured on a wet basis, Equation C–6
section to natural gas combustion, the emissions from all fuels combusted in a of this section is used to calculate the
CO2 mass emissions are calculated only unit, by using quality-assured data from hourly CO2 emission rates:
CO2 = 5.18 x 10−7 ∗ CCO 2 ∗ Q (Eq. C-6)
Where: 5.18 x 10¥7 = Conversion factor (tons/scf-% § 75.11(b)(2) of this chapter or, for
CO2 = CO2 mass emission rate (metric tons/ CO2). certain types of fuel, use a default
hr). (iii) If the CO2 concentration is moisture percentage from § 75.11(b)(1)
CCO2 = Hourly average CO2 concentration (% measured on a dry basis, a correction for of this chapter. For each unit operating
CO2). the stack gas moisture content is hour, a moisture correction must be
Q = Hourly average stack gas volumetric flow required. The owner or operator shall applied to Equation C–6 of this section
rate (scfh). either continuously monitor the stack as follows:
gas moisture content as described in
⎛ 100 − % H 2 O ⎞
CO2* = CO2 ⎜ ⎟ (Eq. C-7)
⎝ 100 ⎠
Where: (v) Each hourly CO2 mass emission (i) An applicable default CO2
CO2* = Hourly CO2 mass emission rate, rate from Equation C–6 or C–7 of this emission factor and an applicable
corrected for moisture (metric tons/hr). section is multiplied by the operating default high heat value for the fuel are
CO2 = Hourly CO2 mass emission rate from time to convert it from metric tons per specified in Table C–1 of this subpart.
Equation C–6 of this section, uncorrected hour to metric tons. The operating time (ii) The owner or operator does not
(tons/hr). is the fraction of the hour during which perform, or receive from the entity
%H2O = Hourly moisture percentage in the supplying the fuel, the results of fuel
stack gas (measured or default value, as
fuel is combusted (e.g., the unit
appropriate). operating time is 1.0 if the unit operates sampling and analysis on a monthly (or
for the whole hour and is 0.5 if the unit more frequent) basis that includes
(iv) An oxygen (O2) concentration operates for 30 minutes in the hour). For measurements of the HHV. If the owner
monitor may be used in lieu of a CO2 common stack configurations, the or operator performs such fuel sampling
concentration monitor to determine the operating time is the fraction of the hour and analysis or receives such fuel
hourly CO2 concentrations, in during which effluent gases flow sampling and analysis results, the Tier
accordance with Equation F–14a or F– through the common stack. 1 Calculation Methodology shall not be
14b (as applicable) in appendix F to part (vi) The hourly CO2 mass emissions used, and the Tier 2, Tier 3, or Tier 4
75 of this chapter, if the effluent gas are then summed over the entire Calculation Methodology shall be used
stream monitored by the CEMS consists calendar year. instead.
solely of combustion products and if (vii) If both biogenic fuel and fossil (2) The Tier 1 Calculation
only fuels that are listed in Table 1 in fuel are combusted during the year, Methodology may also be used to
section 3.3.5 of appendix F to part 75 of determine the biogenic CO2 mass calculate the biogenic CO2 emissions
this chapter are combusted in the unit. emissions separately, as described in from a unit of any size that combusts
If the O2 monitoring option is selected, paragraph (e) of this section. wood, wood waste, or other solid
the F-factors used in Equations F–14a (b) Use of the four tiers. Use of the biomass-derived fuels, except when the
and F–14b shall be determined four tiers of CO2 emissions calculation Tier 4 Calculation Methodology is used
according to section 3.3.5 or section methodologies described in paragraph to quantify the total CO2 mass
3.3.6 of appendix F to part 75 of this (a) of this section is subject to the emissions. If the Tier 4 Calculation
chapter, as applicable. If Equation F– following conditions, requirements, and Methodology is used, the biogenic CO2
14b is used, the hourly moisture restrictions: emissions shall be calculated according
EP10AP09.009</GPH>
percentage in the stack gas shall be (1) The Tier 1 Calculation to paragraph (e) of this section.
either a measured value in accordance Methodology may be used for any type (3) The Tier 2 Calculation
with § 75.11(b)(2) of this chapter, or, for of fuel combusted in a unit with a Methodology may be used for any type
certain types of fuel, a default moisture maximum rated heat input capacity of of fuel combusted in any unit with a
EP10AP09.008</GPH>
value from § 75.11(b)(1) of this chapter. 250 mmBtu/hr or less, provided that: maximum rated heat input capacity of
250 mmBtu/hr or less, provided that a (E) The installed CEMS include a gas specified in paragraphs (b)(5)(ii)(D)
default CO2 emission factor for the fuel monitor of any kind, a stack gas through (b)(5)(ii)(F) of this section.
is specified in Table C–1 or C–2 of this volumetric flow rate monitor, or both (6) The Tier 4 Calculation
subpart. and the monitors have been certified in Methodology, if selected or required,
(4) The Tier 3 Calculation accordance with the requirements of shall be used beginning on:
Methodology may be used for a unit of part 75 of this chapter, part 60 of this (i) January 1, 2010, for a unit is
any size, combusting any type of fuel, chapter, or an applicable State required to report CO2 mass emissions
except when the use of Tier 4 is continuous monitoring program. beginning on that date, if all of the
required or elected, as provided in (F) The installed gas and/or stack gas monitors needed to measure CO2 mass
paragraph (b)(5) of this section. volumetric flow rate monitors are emissions have been installed and
(5) The Tier 4 Calculation required, by an applicable Federal or certified by that date.
Methodology: State regulation or the unit’s operating (ii) January 1, 2011, for a unit that is
(i) May be used for a unit of any size, permit, to undergo periodic quality required to report CO2 mass emissions
combusting any type of fuel. assurance testing in accordance with beginning on January 1, 2010, if all of
(ii) Shall be used for a unit if: appendix B to part 75 of this chapter, the monitors needed to measure CO2
appendix F to part 60 of this chapter, or mass emissions have not been installed
(A) The unit has a maximum rated
an applicable State continuous and certified by January 1, 2010. In this
heat input capacity greater than 250
monitoring program.
mmBtu/hr, or if the unit combusts case, the owner or operator shall use the
(iii) Shall be used for a unit with a
municipal solid waste and has a Tier 3 Calculation Methodology in 2010.
maximum rated heat input capacity of
maximum rated input capacity greater 250 mmBtu/hr or less and for a unit that (c) Calculation of CH4 and N2O
than 250 tons per day of MSW. combusts municipal solid waste with a emissions from all fuel combustion.
(B) The unit combusts solid fossil fuel maximum rated input capacity of 250 Calculate the annual CH4 and N2O mass
or MSW, either as a primary or tons of MSW per day or less, if the unit: emissions from stationary fuel
secondary fuel. (A) Has both a stack gas volumetric combustion sources as follows:
(C) The unit has operated for more flow rate monitor and a CO2 (1) For units subject to the
than 1,000 hours in any calendar year concentration monitor. requirements of the Acid Rain Program
since 2005. (B) The unit meets the other and for other units monitoring and
(D) The unit has installed CEMS that conditions specified in paragraphs reporting heat input on a year-round
are required either by an applicable (b)(5)(ii)(B) and (C) of this section. basis according to § § 75.10(c) and 75.64
Federal or State regulation or the unit’s (C) The CO2 and stack gas volumetric of this chapter, use Equation C–8 of this
operating permit. flow rate monitors meet the conditions section:
CH 4 or N 2 O = 1 x 10−3 ∗ (HI ) A ∗ EF (Eq. C-8)
Where: EF = Fuel-specific emission factor for CH4 or section to calculate the annual CH4 and
CH4 or N2O = Annual CH4 or N2O emissions N2O, from Table C–3 of this subpart (kg N2O emissions.
from the combustion of a particular type CH4 or N2O per mmBtu). (i) If a default high heat value for a
of fuel (metric tons). 1 x 10¥3 = Conversion factor from kg to particular fuel is specified in Table C–
(HI)A = Cumulative annual heat input from metric tons. 1 of this subpart and if the HHV is not
the fuel, derived from the electronic data measured or provided by the entity
(2) For all other units, use the
report required under § 75.64 of this supplying the fuel on a monthly (or
chapter (mmBtu). applicable equations and procedures in more frequent) basis throughout the
paragraphs (c)(2) through (4) of this year, use Equation C–9 of this section:
CH 4 or N 2 O = 1 x 10−3 ∗ Fuel ∗ HHV ∗ EF (Eq. C-9)
Where: HHV = Default high heat value of the fuel (ii) If the high heat value of a
CH4 or N2O = Annual CH4 or N2O emissions from Table C–1 of this subpart (mmBtu particular fuel (except for municipal
per mass or volume). solid waste) is measured on a monthly
from the combustion of a particular type
EF = Fuel-specific default emission factor for
of fuel (metric tons). CH4 or N2O, from Table C–3 of this (or more frequent) basis throughout the
Fuel = Mass or volume of the fuel combusted, subpart (kg CH4 or N2O per mmBtu). year, or if such data are provided by the
from company records (mass or volume 1 x 10¥3 = Conversion factor from kilograms entity supplying the fuel, use Equation
per year). to metric tons. C–10a of this section:
EP10AP09.012</MATH>
n
CH 4 or N 2 O = ∑1 x 10−3 ∗ ( Fuel ) p ∗ ( HHV ) p ∗ EF (Eq. C-10a)
p =1
EP10AP09.011</MATH>
Where: CH4 or N2O = Annual CH4 or N2O emissions n = Number of required heat content
from the combustion of a particular type measurements for the year.
of fuel (metric tons). (Fuel)p = Mass or volume of the fuel
EP10AP09.010</GPH>
combusted during the measurement
period ‘‘p’’ (mass or volume per unit EF = Fuel-specific default emission factor for (iii) For municipal solid waste
time). CH4 or N2O, from Table C–3 of this combustion, use Equation C–10b of this
(HHV)p = Measured high heat value of the subpart (kg CH4 or N2O per mmBtu). section to estimate CH4 and N2O
fuel for period ‘‘p’’ (mmBtu per mass or 1 x 10 3 = Conversion factor from
volume). emissions:
kilograms to metric tons.
p = Measurement period (day or month, as
applicable).
CH 4 or N 2 O = 1 x 10−3 ( Steam) ( B) ( EF ) (Eq. C-10b)
Where: is equipped with a wet flue gas operator shall estimate and report the
CH4 or N2O = Annual CH4 or N2O emissions desulfurization system, or uses other total annual biogenic CO2 emissions,
from the combustion of a municipal acid gas emission controls with sorbent according to paragraph (e)(1), (2), (3), or
solid waste (metric tons). injection, use the following equation to (4) of this section, as applicable.
Steam = Total mass of steam generated by calculate the CO2 emissions from the (1) The owner or operator may use
MSW combustion during the reporting sorbent, if those CO2 emissions are not
year (lb steam).
Equation C–1 of this section to calculate
monitored by CEMS: the annual CO2 mass emissions from the
B = Ratio of the boiler’s maximum rated heat
input capacity to its design rated steam combustion of biogenic fuel, for a unit
output (mmBtu/lb steam). ⎛ MWCO 2 ⎞ of any size, provided that:
EF = Fuel-specific emission factor for CH4 or CO2 = S ∗ R ∗ ⎜ ⎟ (Eq. C-11) (i) The Tier 4 calculation
N2O, from Table C–3 of this subpart (kg ⎝ MWS ⎠ methodology is not required or elected.
CH4 or N2O per mmBtu). Where: (ii) The biogenic fuel consists of
1 x 10 3 = Conversion factor from
CO2 = CO2 emitted from sorbent for the wood, wood waste, or other biomass-
kilograms to metric tons. reporting year (metric tons). derived solid fuels (except for MSW).
(3) Multiply the result from Equations S = Limestone or other sorbent used in the (2) If CEMS are used to determine the
C–8, C–9, C–10a, or C–10b of this reporting year (metric tons).
total annual CO2 emissions, either
R = Ratio of moles of CO2 released upon
section (as applicable) by the global capture of one mole of acid gas. according to part 75 of this chapter or
warming potential (GWP) factor to MWCO2 = Molecular weight of carbon dioxide the Tier 4 Calculation Methodology of
convert the CH4 or N2O emissions to (44). this section and if both fossil fuel and
metric tons of CO2 equivalent. MWS = Molecular weight of sorbent (100, if biogenic fuel (except for MSW) are
(4) If, for a particular type of fuel, calcium carbonate). combusted in the unit during the
default CH4 and N2O emission factors (2) The total annual CO2 mass reporting year, use the following
are not provided in Table C–4 of this emissions for the unit shall be the sum procedure to determine the annual
subpart, the owner or operator may, of the CO2 emissions from the biogenic CO2 mass emissions. If MSW is
subject to the approval of the combustion process and the CO2 combusted in the unit, follow the
Administrator, develop site-specific CH4 emissions from the sorbent. procedures in paragraph (e)(3) of this
and N2O emission factors, based on the (e) Biogenic CO2 emissions. If any fuel section:
results of source testing. combusted in the unit meet the (i) For each operating hour, use
(d) Calculation of CO2 from sorbent. definition of biomass or biomass- Equation C–12 of this section to
(1) When a unit is a fluidized bed boiler, derived fuel in § 98.6, then the owner or determine the volume of CO2 emitted.
( %CO2 )h
VCO 2 h = ∗ Qh ∗ th (Eq. C-12)
100
EP10AP09.017</MATH>
Where: two or more types of fossil fuel are this chapter or a site-specific value
VCO2h = Hourly volume of CO2 emitted (scf). combusted during the year, perform a determined under section 3.3.6 of
(%CO2)h = Hourly CO2 concentration, separate calculation with Equation C–13 appendix F to part 75 of this chapter (scf
measured by the CO2 concentration of this section for each fuel and sum the CO2/mmBtu).
monitor (%CO2). GCV = Gross calorific value of the fossil fuel,
EP10AP09.016</MATH>
results. from fuel sampling and analysis (annual
Qh = Hourly stack gas volumetric flow rate,
measured by the stack gas volumetric average value in Btu/lb for solid fuel,
flow rate monitor (scfh). Fuel ∗ Fc ∗ GCV Btu/gal for liquid fuel and Btu/scf for
th = Source operating time (decimal fraction
V ff = (Eq. C-13) gaseous fuel).
106 10 6 = Conversion factor, Btu per mmBtu.
of the hour during which the source
Where:
EP10AP09.015</MATH>
combusts fuel, i.e., 1.0 for a full

operating hour, 0.5 for 30 minutes of Vff = Annual volume of CO2 emitted from (iv) Subtract Vff from Vtotal to obtain
operation, etc.). combustion of a particular fossil fuel Vbio, the annual volume of CO2 from the
100 = Conversion factor from percent to a (scf). combustion of biogenic fuels.
decimal fraction. Fuel = Total quantity of the fossil fuel (v) Calculate the biogenic percentage
combusted in the reporting year, from
EP10AP09.014</MATH>
(ii) Sum all of the hourly VCO2h values of the annual CO2 emissions, using
company records (lb for solid fuel,
for the reporting year, to obtain Vtotal, gallons for liquid fuel, and scf for
Equation C–14 of this section:
the total annual volume of CO2 emitted. gaseous fuel).
(iii) Calculate the annual volume of Fc = Fuel-specific carbon based F-factor, Vbio
CO2 emitted from fossil fuel combustion either a default value from Table 1 in
% Biogenic = x 100 (Eq. C-14)
Vtotal
EP10AP09.013</MATH>
using Equation C–13 of this section. If section 3.3.5 of appendix F to part 75 of
(vi) Calculate the annual biogenic CO2 section shall be the results of the (1) Monthly, for natural gas, biogas,
mass emissions, in metric tons, by calculation performed under paragraph fuel oil, and other liquid fuels.
multiplying the percent Biogenic (e)(3)(ii)(D) of this section. (2) For coal and other solid fuels,
obtained from Equation C–14 of this (F) Calculate the annual biogenic CO2 weekly sampling is required to obtain
section of this section by the total mass emissions according to paragraph composite samples, which are analyzed
annual CO2 mass emissions in metric (e)(2)(vi) of this section. monthly.
tons, as determined under paragraph (4) For biogas combustion, the Tier 2 (d) For the Tier 3 Calculation
(a)(1)(iv) of this section. or Tier 3 Calculation Methodology shall Methodology:
(3) For a unit that combusts MSW, the be used to determine the annual (1) All oil and gas flow meters (except
owner or operator shall use, for each biogenic CO2 mass emissions, except as for gas billing meters) shall be calibrated
quarter, ASTM Methods D 6866–06a provided in paragraph (e)(2) of this prior to the first year for which GHG
and D 7459–08, as described in section. emissions are reported under this part,
§ 98.34(f), to determine the relative using an applicable flow meter test
proportions of biogenic and non- § 98.34 Monitoring and QA/QC method listed in § 98.7 or the calibration
biogenic CO2 emissions when MSW is requirements. procedures specified by the flow meter
combusted. The results of each The CO2 mass emissions data for manufacturer. Fuel flow meters shall be
determination shall be expressed as a stationary combustion units shall be recalibrated either annually or at the
decimal fraction (e.g., 0.30, if 30 percent quality-assured as follows: minimum frequency specified by the
of the CO2 from MSW combustion is (a) For units using the calculation manufacturer.
biogenic), and the quarterly values shall methodologies described in this (2) Oil tank drop measurements (if
be averaged over the reporting year. The paragraph, the records required under applicable) shall be performed
annual biogenic CO2 emissions shall be § 98.3(g) shall include both the company according to one of the methods listed
calculated as follows: records and a detailed explanation of in § 98.7.
(i) If the unit qualifies for the Tier 2 how company records are used to (3) The carbon content of the fuels
or Tier 3 Calculation Methodology of estimate the following: listed in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this
this section and the owner or operator (1) Fuel consumption, when the Tier section shall be determined monthly.
elects to use the Tier 2 or Tier 3 1 and Tier 2 Calculation Methodologies For other gaseous fuels (e.g., refinery
Calculation Methodology to quantify described in § 98.33(a) are used. gas, or process gas), daily sampling and
GHG emissions: (2) Fuel consumption, when solid fuel analysis is required to determine the
(A) Use Equations C–2a, C–2b and C– is combusted and the Tier 3 Calculation carbon content and molecular weight of
3 of this section, as applicable, to Methodology in § 98.33(a)(3) is used. the fuel. An applicable method listed in
calculate the annual CO2 mass (3) Fossil fuel consumption, when, § 98.7 shall be used to determine the
emissions from MSW combustion and pursuant to § 98.33(e), the owner or carbon content and (if applicable)
from any auxiliary fuels such as natural operator of a unit that uses CEMS to molecular weight of the fuel.
gas. Sum these values, to obtain the total (e) For the Tier 4 Calculation
quantify CO2 emissions and that
annual CO2 mass emissions from the Methodology, the CO2 and flow rate
combusts both fossil and biogenic fuels
unit. monitors must be certified prior to the
separately reports the biogenic portion
(B) Determine the annual biogenic applicable deadline specified in
of the total annual CO2 emissions.
CO2 mass emissions from MSW § 98.33(b)(6).
(4) Sorbent usage, if the methodology (1) For initial certification, use the
combustion as follows. Multiply the in § 98.33(d) is used to calculate CO2
total annual CO2 mass emissions from following procedures:
emissions from sorbent. (i) Section 75.20(c)(2) and (4) and
MSW combustion by the biogenic
(b) The owner or operator shall appendix A to part 75) of this chapter.
decimal fraction obtained from ASTM
document the procedures used to ensure (ii) The calibration drift test and
Methods D 6866–06a and D 7459–08.
(ii) If the unit uses CEMS to quantify the accuracy of the estimates of fuel relative accuracy test audit (RATA)
CO2 emissions: usage and sorbent usage (as applicable) procedures of Performance Specification
(A) Follow the procedures in in paragraph (a) of this section, 3 in appendix B to part 60 (for the CO2
paragraphs (e)(2)(i) and (ii) of this including, but not limited to, calibration concentration monitor) and Performance
section, to determine Vtotal. of weighing equipment, fuel flow Specification 6 in appendix B to part 60
(B) If any fossil fuel was combusted meters, and other measurement devices. (for the continuous emission rate
during the year, follow the procedures The estimated accuracy of monitoring system (CERMS)).
in paragraph (e)(2)(iii) of this section, to measurements made with these devices (iii) The provisions of an applicable
determine Vff. shall also be recorded, and the technical State continuous monitoring program.
(C) Subtract Vff from Vtotal, to obtain basis for these estimates shall be (2) If an O2 concentration monitor is
VMSW, the total annual volume of CO2 provided. used to determine CO2 concentrations,
emissions from MSW combustion. (c) For the Tier 2 Calculation the applicable provisions of part 75 of
(D) Determine the annual volume of Methodology, the applicable fuel this chapter, part 60 of this chapter, or
biogenic CO2 emissions from MSW sampling and analysis methods an applicable State continuous
combustion as follows. Multiply the incorporated by reference in § 98.7 shall monitoring program shall be followed
annual volume of CO2 emissions from be used to determine the high heat for initial certification and on-going
MSW combustion by the biogenic values. For coal, the samples shall be quality assurance, and all required
decimal fraction obtained from ASTM taken at a location in the fuel handling RATAs of the monitor shall be done on
Methods D 6866–06a and D 7459–08. system that provides a sample a percent CO2 basis.
(E) Calculate the biogenic percentage representative of the fuel bunkered or (3) For ongoing quality assurance,
of the total annual CO2 emissions from consumed. The minimum frequency of follow the applicable procedures in
the unit, using Equation C–14 of this the sampling and analysis for each type appendix B to part 75 of this chapter,
section. For the purposes of this of fuel (only for the weeks or months appendix F to part 60 of this chapter, or
calculation, the term ‘‘Vbio’’ in the when that fuel is combusted in the unit) an applicable State continuous
numerator of Equation C–14 of this is as follows: monitoring program. If appendix F to
part 60 of this chapter is selected for on- 3, or Tier 4 calculation is used, perform (9) The total GHG emissions from the
going quality assurance, perform daily missing data substitution as follows for unit for the reporting year, i.e., the sum
calibration drift (CD) assessments for each parameter: of the CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions for
both the CO2 and flow rate monitors, (1) For each missing value of the heat all fuel types, expressed in metric tons
conduct cylinder gas audits of the CO2 content, carbon content, or molecular of CO2e.
concentration monitor in three of the weight of the fuel, and for each missing (c) Reporting alternatives for
four quarters of each year (except for value of CO2 concentration and percent stationary combustion units. For
non-operating quarters), and perform moisture, the substitute data value shall stationary combustion units, the
annual RATAs of the CO2 concentration be the arithmetic average of the quality- following reporting alternatives may be
monitor and the CERMS. assured values of that parameter used to simplify the unit-level reporting
(4) For the purposes of this part, the immediately preceding and immediately required under paragraph (b) of this
stack gas volumetric flow rate monitor following the missing data incident. If, section:
RATAs required by appendix B to part for a particular parameter, no quality- (1) Aggregation of small units. If a
75 of this chapter and the annual assured data are available prior to the facility contains two or more units (e.g.,
RATAs of the CERMS required by missing data incident, the substitute boilers or combustion turbines) that
appendix F to part 60 of this chapter data value shall be the first quality- have a combined maximum rated heat
need only be done at one operating assured value obtained after the missing input capacity of 250 mmBtu/hr or less,
level, representing normal load or data period. the owner or operator may report the
normal process operating conditions, (2) For missing records of stack gas combined emissions for the group of
both for initial certification and for flow rate, fuel usage, and sorbent usage, units in lieu of reporting separately the
ongoing quality assurance. the substitute data value shall be the GHG emissions from the individual
(f) When municipal solid waste best available estimate of the flow rate, units, provided that the amount of each
(MSW) is combusted in a unit, the fuel usage, or sorbent consumption, type of fuel combusted in the units in
biogenic portion of the CO2 emissions based on all available process data (e.g., the group is accurately quantified. More
from MSW combustion shall be steam production, electrical load, and than one such group of units may be
determined using ASTM D6866–06a operating hours). The owner or operator defined at a facility, so long as the
and ASTM D7459–08. The ASTM shall document and keep records of the aggregate maximum rated heat input
D6866–06a analysis shall be performed procedures used for all such estimates. capacity of the units in the group does
at least once in every calendar quarter not exceed 250 mmBtu/hr. If this option
in which MSW is combusted in the unit. § 98.36 Data reporting requirements. is selected, the following information
Each gas sample shall be taken using (a) In addition to the facility-level shall be reported instead of the
ASTM D7459–08, during normal unit information required under § 98.3, the information in paragraph (b) of this
operating conditions while MSW is the annual GHG emissions report shall section:
only fuel being combusted, for at least contain the unit-level or process-level (i) Group ID number, beginning with
24 consecutive hours or for as long as emissions data in paragraph (b) and (c) the prefix ‘‘GP’’.
is necessary to obtain a sample large of this section (as applicable) and the (ii) The ID number of each unit in the
enough to meet the specifications of emissions verification data in paragraph group.
ASTM D6866–06a. The owner or (d) of this section. (iii) Cumulative maximum rated heat
operator shall separate total CO2 (b) Unit-level emissions data input capacity of the group (mmBtu/hr).
emissions from MSW combustion in to reporting. Except where aggregation of (iv) Each type of fuel combusted in
biogenic emissions and non-biogenic unit-level information is permitted the units during the reporting year.
emissions, using the average proportion under paragraph (c) of this section, the (v) The calculated CO2, CH4, and N2O
of biogenic emissions of all samples owner or operator shall report: mass emissions for each type of fuel
analyzed during the reporting year. If (1) The unit ID number (if applicable). combusted in the group of units during
there is a common fuel source of MSW (2) A code representing the type of the year, expressed in metric tons of
that feeds multiple units at the facility, unit. each gas and in metric tons of CO2e.
performing the testing at only one of the (3) Maximum rated heat input (vi) The methodology used to
units is sufficient. capacity of the unit, in mmBtu/hr calculate the CO2 mass emissions for
(boilers, combustion turbines, engines, each type of fuel combusted in the
§ 98.35 Procedures for estimating missing and process heaters only). units.
data. (4) Each type of fuel combusted in the (vii) The calculated CO2 mass
Whenever a quality-assured value of a unit during the report year. emissions (if any) from sorbent.
required parameter is unavailable (e.g., (5) The calculated CO2, CH4, and N2O (viii) The total GHG emissions from
if a CEMS malfunctions during unit emissions for each type of fuel the group for the year, i.e., the sum of
operation or if a required fuel sample is combusted, expressed in metric tons of the CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions across,
not taken), a substitute data value for each gas and in metric tons of CO2e. all fuel types, expressed in metric tons
the missing parameter shall be used in (6) The method used to calculate the of CO2e.
the calculations. CO2 emissions for each type of fuel (2) Monitored common stack
(a) For all units subject to the combusted (e.g., part 75 of this chapter configurations. When the flue gases
requirements of the Acid Rain Program, or the Tier 1 or Tier 2 calculation from two or more stationary combustion
the applicable missing data substitution methodology) units at a facility are discharged through
procedures in part 75 of this chapter (7) If applicable, indicate which one a common stack, if CEMS are used to
shall be followed for CO2 concentration, of the monitoring and reporting continuously monitor CO2 mass
stack gas flow rate, fuel flow rate, gross methodologies in part 75 of this chapter emissions at the common stack
calorific value (GCV), and fuel carbon was used to quantify the CO2 emissions according to part 75 of this chapter or
content. (e.g., CEMS, appendix G, LME). as described in the Tier 4 Calculation
(b) For all units that are not subject to (8) The calculated CO2 emissions from Methodology in § 98.33(a)(4), the owner
the requirements of the Acid Rain sorbent (if any), expressed in metric or operator may report the combined
Program, when the Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier tons. emissions from the units sharing the
common stack, in lieu of reporting (iv) The type of fuel combusted in the heat input capacity to its design rated
separately the GHG emissions from the units during the reporting year. steam output capacity, in mmBtu per lb
individual units. If this option is (v) The methodology used to calculate of steam.
selected, the following information shall the CO2 mass emissions. (iii) For the Tier 3 Calculation
be reported instead of the information in (vi) The total CO2 mass emissions Methodology, report:
paragraph (b) of this section: from the units served by the common (A) The total quantity of each type of
(i) Common stack ID number, pipe for the reporting year, expressed in fuel combusted during each month or
beginning with the prefix ‘‘CS’’. metric tons of CO2e. day (as applicable), in metric tons for
(ii) ID numbers of the units sharing (vii) The combined annual CH4 and solid fuels, gallons for liquid fuels, and
the common stack. N2O emissions from the units served by scf for gaseous fuels.
(iii) Maximum rated heat input the common pipe, expressed in metric (B) The number of required carbon
capacity of each unit sharing the tons of each gas and in metric tons of content determinations for each type of
common stack (mmBtu/hr). CO2e. fuel for the reporting year,
(iv) Each type of fuel combusted in (viii) The total GHG emissions for the corresponding (as applicable) to the
the units during the year. reporting year from the units served by number of operating days or months
(v) The methodology used to calculate the common pipe, i.e., the sum of the when each type of fuel was combusted,
the CO2 mass emissions (i.e., CEMS or CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions, expressed in accordance with §§ 98.33(a)(3) and
the Tier 4 Calculation Methodology). in metric tons of CO2e. 98.34(d).
(vi) The total CO2 mass emissions (d) Verification data. The owner or (C) For each operating month or day,
measured at the common stack for the operator shall report sufficient data and the carbon content (CC) value used in
year, expressed in metric tons of CO2e. supplementary information to verify the Equation C–3, C–4, or C–5 of this
(vii) The combined annual CH4 and reported GHG emissions. subpart (as applicable), expressed as a
N2O emissions from the units sharing (1) For stationary combustion sources decimal fraction for solid fuels, kg C per
the common stack, expressed in metric using the Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3, or Tier gallon for liquid fuels, and kg C per kg
tons of each gas and in metric tons of 4 Calculation Methodology in of fuel for gaseous fuels.
CO2e. § 98.33(a)(4) to quantify CO2 emissions, (D) For gaseous fuel combustion, the
(A) If the monitoring is done the following additional information molecular weight of the fuel used in
according to part 75 of this chapter, use shall be included in the GHG emissions Equation C–5 of this subpart, for each
Equation C–8 of this subpart, where the report: operating month or day, in kg per kg-
term ‘‘(HI)A’’ is the cumulative annual (i) For the Tier 1 Calculation mole.
heat input measured at the common Methodology, report the total quantity (E) For each reported CC value,
stack. of each type of fuel combusted during indicate whether it is an actual
(B) For the Tier 4 calculation the reporting year, in short tons for solid measured value or a substitute data
methodology, use Equation C–9, C–10a fuels, gallons for liquid fuels and scf for value.
or C–10b of this subpart separately for gaseous fuels. (F) For liquid and gaseous fuel
each type of fuel combusted in the units (ii) For the Tier 2 Calculation combustion, the dates and results of the
during the year, and then sum the Methodology, report: initial calibrations and periodic
emissions for all fuel types. (A) The total quantity of each type of recalibrations of the fuel flow meters
(viii) The total GHG emissions for the fuel combusted during each month used to measure the amount of fuel
year from the units that share the (except for MSW). Express the quantity combusted.
common stack, i.e., the sum of the CO2, of each fuel combusted during the (G) For fuel oil combustion, each
CH4, and N2O emissions, expressed in measurement period in short tons for method from § 98.7 used to make tank
metric tons of CO2e. solid fuels, gallons for liquid fuels, and drop measurements (if applicable).
(3) Common pipe configurations. scf for gaseous fuels. (H) Each method from § 98.7 used to
When two or more oil-fired or gas-fired (B) The number of required high heat determine the CC for each type of fuel
stationary combustion units at a facility value determinations for each type of combusted.
combust the same type of fuel and that fuel for the reporting year (i.e., ‘‘n’’ in (I) Each method from § 98.7 used to
fuel is fed to the individual units Equation C–2a of this subpart, calibrate the fuel flow meters (if
through a common supply line or pipe, corresponding (as applicable) to the applicable).
the owner or operator may report the number of operating days or months (iv) For the Tier 4 Calculation
combined emissions from the units when each type of fuel was combusted, Methodology, report:
served by the common supply line, in in accordance with § § 98.33(a)(2) and (A) The total number of source
lieu of reporting separately the GHG 98.34(c). operating days and the total number of
emissions from the individual units, (C) For each month, the high heat source operating hours in the reporting
provided that the total amount of fuel value used in Equation C–2a of this year.
combusted by the units is accurately subpart for each type of fuel combusted, (B) Whether the CEMS certification
measured at the common pipe or supply in mmBtu per short ton for solid fuels, and quality assurance procedures of part
line using a calibrated fuel flow meter. mmBtu per gallon for liquid fuels, and 75 of this chapter, part 60 of this
If this option is selected, the following mmBtu per scf for gaseous fuels. chapter, or an applicable State
information shall be reported instead of (D) For each reported HHV, indicate continuous monitoring program have
the information in paragraph (b) of this whether it is an actual measured value been selected.
section: or a substitute data value. (C) The CO2 emissions on each
(i) Common pipe ID number, (E) Each method from § 98.7 used to operating day, i.e., the sum of the hourly
beginning with the prefix ‘‘CP’’. determine the HHV for each type of fuel values calculated from Equation C–6 or
(ii) ID numbers of the units served by combusted. C–7 (as applicable), in metric tons.
the common pipe. (F) For MSW, the total quantity (i.e., (D) For CO2 concentration, stack gas
(iii) Maximum rated heat input lb) of steam produced from MSW flow rate, and (if applicable) stack gas
capacity of each unit served by the combustion during the year, and ‘‘B’’, moisture content, the number of source
common pipe (mmBtu/hr). the ratio of the unit’s maximum rate operating hours in which a substitute
data value of each parameter was used report the following additional subpart is used to calculate CO2
in the emissions calculations. information, as applicable: emissions.
(E) The dates and results of the initial (A) The annual volume of CO2 (ii) A detailed explanation of how
certification tests of the CEMS, and emitted from the combustion of all company records are used to quantify
(F) The dates and results of the major fuels, i.e., Vtotal, in scf. fuel consumption, if solid fuel is
quality assurance tests performed on the (B) The annual volume of CO2 emitted combusted and the Tier 3 Calculation
CEMS during the reporting year, i.e., from the combustion of fossil fuels, i.e., Methodology in § 98.33(a)(3) is used to
linearity checks, cylinder gas audits, Vff, in scf. If more than one type of fossil calculate CO2 emissions.
and relative accuracy test audits fuel was combusted, report the (iii) A detailed explanation of how
(RATAs). combustion volume of CO2 for each fuel sorbent usage is quantified, if the
(v) If CO2 emissions that are generated separately as well as the total. methodology in § 98.33(d) is used to
from acid gas scrubbing with sorbent (C) The annual volume of CO2 emitted calculate CO2 emissions from sorbent.
injection are not captured using CEMS, from the combustion of biogenic fuels, (iv) A detailed explanation of how
report: i.e., Vbio, in scf. company records are used to quantify
(A) The total amount of sorbent used (D) The carbon-based F-factor used in fossil fuel consumption, when, as
during the report year, in metric tons. Equation C–14 of this subpart, for each described in § 98.33(e), the owner or
(B) The molecular weight of the type of fossil fuel combusted, in scf CO2 operator of a unit that combusts both
sorbent. per mmBtu. fossil fuel and biogenic fuel uses CEMS
(C) The ratio (‘‘R’’) in Equation C–11 (E) The annual average GCV value to quantify CO2 emissions.
of this subpart. used in Equation C–14 of this subpart, § 98.37 Records that must be retained.
(vi) When ASTM methods D7459–08 for each type of fossil fuel combusted,
The recordkeeping requirements of
and D6866–06a are used to determine in Btu/lb, Btu/gal, or Btu/scf, as
§ 98.3(g) and, if applicable, § 98.34(a)
the biogenic portion of the annual CO2 appropriate.
and (b) shall be fully met for affected
emissions from MSW combustion, as (F) The total quantity of each type of facilities with stationary combustion
described in §§ 98.33(e) and 98.34(f), the fossil fuel combusted during the sources. Also, the records required
owner or operator shall report: reporting year, in lb, gallons, or scf, as under § 98.35(a)(1), documenting the
(A) The results of each quarterly appropriate. data substitution procedures for missing
sample analysis, expressed as a decimal (G) The total annual biogenic CO2 stack flow rate, fuel flow rate, fuel usage
fraction, e.g., if the biogenic fraction of mass emissions, in metric tons. and (if applicable) sorbent usage
the CO2 emissions from MSW (2) Within 7 days of receipt of a information and site-specific source
combustion is 30 percent, report 0.30. written request (e.g., a request by testing (as allowed in § 98.33(c)(4)),
(B) The total quantity of MSW electronic mail) from the Administrator shall be retained. No special
combusted during the reporting year, in or from the applicable State or local air recordkeeping beyond that specified in
short tons if the Tier 2 Calculation pollution control agency, the owner or §§ 98.3, 98.35(a)(4), and 98.34(a) and (b)
Methodology is used or in metric tons operator shall submit the explanations is required. All required records must be
if the Tier 3 calculation methodology is described in § 98.34(a) and (b), as retained for a period of five years.
used. follows:
(vii) For units that combust both fossil (i) A detailed explanation of how § 98.38 Definitions.
fuel and biogenic fuel, when CEMS are company records are used to quantify All terms used in this subpart have
used to quantify the annual CO2 fuel consumption, if Calculation the same meaning given in the Clean Air
emissions, the owner or operator shall Methodology Tier 1 or Tier 2 of this Act and subpart A of this part.
TABLE C–1 OF 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 ..................................................................................................................................................... 25.09 103.54

Bituminous ................................................................................................................................................... 24.93 93.40
Sub-bituminous ............................................................................................................................................ 17.25 97.02
Lignite .......................................................................................................................................................... 14.21 96.36
Unspecified (Residential/Commercial) ......................................................................................................... 22.24 95.26
Unspecified (Industrial Coking) .................................................................................................................... 26.28 93.65
Unspecified (Other Industrial) ...................................................................................................................... 22.18 93.91
Unspecified (Electric Power) ....................................................................................................................... 19.97 94.38.
Coke ............................................................................................................................................................. 24.80 102.04
Natural Gas mmBtu/scf kg CO2/mmBtu.
Unspecified (Weighted U.S. Average) ......................................................................................................... 1.027 x 10¥3 53.02
Petroleum Products mmBtu/gallon kg CO2/mmBtu
Asphalt & Road Oil ...................................................................................................................................... 0.158 75.55

Aviation gasoline .......................................................................................................................................... 0.120 69.14
Distillate Fuel Oil (# 1, 2, & 4) ..................................................................................................................... 0.139 73.10
Jet Fuel ........................................................................................................................................................ 0.135 70.83
Kerosene ...................................................................................................................................................... 0.135 72.25
LPG (energy use) ........................................................................................................................................ 0.092 62.98
TABLE C–1 OF SUBPART C—DEFAULT CO2 EMISSION FACTORS AND HIGH HEAT VALUES FOR VARIOUS TYPES OF FUEL—
Continued
Default high heat Default CO2
Fuel type value emission factor
Propane ....................................................................................................................................................... 0.091 63.02

Ethane .......................................................................................................................................................... 0.069 59.54
Isobutane ..................................................................................................................................................... 0.099 65.04
n-Butane ...................................................................................................................................................... 0.103 64.93
Lubricants .................................................................................................................................................... 0.144 74.16
Motor Gasoline ............................................................................................................................................ 0.124 70.83
Residual Fuel Oil (# 5 & 6) .......................................................................................................................... 0.150 78.74
Crude Oil ...................................................................................................................................................... 0.138 74.49
Naphtha (< 401 deg. F) ............................................................................................................................... 0.125 66.46
Natural Gasoline .......................................................................................................................................... 0.110 66.83
Other Oil (> 401 deg. F) .............................................................................................................................. 0.139 73.10
Pentanes Plus .............................................................................................................................................. 0.110 66.83
Petrochemical Feedstocks ........................................................................................................................... 0.129 70.97
Petroleum Coke ........................................................................................................................................... 0.143 102.04
Special Naphtha .......................................................................................................................................... 0.125 72.77
Unfinished Oils ............................................................................................................................................. 0.139 74.49
Waxes .......................................................................................................................................................... 0.132 72.58
Biomass-derived Fuels (solid) mmBtu/short Ton kg CO2/mmBtu
Wood and Wood waste (12% moisture content) or other solid biomass-derived fuels .............................. 15.38 93.80
Biomass-derived Fuels (Gas) mmBtu/scf kg CO2/mmBtu
Biogas .......................................................................................................................................................... Varies 52.07

Note: Heat content factors are based on higher heating values (HHV). Also, for petroleum products, the default heat content values have been
converted from units of mmBtu per barrel to mmBtu per gallon.
TABLE C–2 OF SUBPART C—DEFAULT CO2 EMISSION FACTORS FOR THE COMBUSTION OF ALTERNATIVE FUELS
Default CO2
Fuel type emission factor
(kg CO2/mmBtu)
Waste Oil ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 74

Tires ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 85
Plastics ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 75
Solvents ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 74
Impregnated Saw Dust ................................................................................................................................................................ 75
Other Fossil based wastes .......................................................................................................................................................... 80
Dried Sewage Sludge .................................................................................................................................................................. 110
Mixed Industrial waste ................................................................................................................................................................. 83
Municipal Solid Waste ................................................................................................................................................................. 90.652
Note: Emission factors are based on higher heating values (HHV). Values were converted from LHV to HHV assuming that LHV are 5 percent
lower than HHV for solid and liquid fuels.
TABLE C–3 OF SUBPART C—DEFAULT CH4 AND N2O EMISSION FACTORS FOR VARIOUS TYPES OF FUEL
Default CH4 Default N2O
Fuel type emission factor emission factor
(kg CH4/mmBtu) (kg N2O/mmBtu)
Asphalt ......................................................................................................................................................... 3.0 × 10¥3 6.0 × 10¥4

Aviation Gasoline ......................................................................................................................................... 3.0 × 10¥3 6.0 × 10¥4
Coal .............................................................................................................................................................. 1.0 × 10¥2 1.5 × 10¥3
Crude Oil ...................................................................................................................................................... 3.0 × 10¥3 6.0 × 10¥4
Digester Gas ................................................................................................................................................ 9.0 × 10¥4 1.0 × 10¥4
Distillate ....................................................................................................................................................... 3.0 × 10¥3 6.0 × 10¥4
Gasoline ....................................................................................................................................................... 3.0 × 10¥3 6.0 × 10¥4
Jet Fuel ........................................................................................................................................................ 3.0 × 10¥3 6.0 × 10¥4
Kerosene ...................................................................................................................................................... 3.0 × 10¥3 6.0 × 10¥4
Landfill Gas .................................................................................................................................................. 9.0 × 10¥4 1.0 × 10¥4
LPG .............................................................................................................................................................. 1.0 × 10¥3 1.0 × 10¥4
Lubricants .................................................................................................................................................... 3.0 × 10¥3 6.0 × 10¥4
Municipal Solid Waste ................................................................................................................................. 3.0 × 10¥2 4.0 × 10¥3
Naphtha ....................................................................................................................................................... 3.0 × 10¥3 6.0 × 10¥4
Natural Gas .................................................................................................................................................. 9.0 × 10¥4 1.0 × 10¥4
Natural Gas Liquids ..................................................................................................................................... 3.0 × 10¥3 6.0 × 10¥4
Other Biomass ............................................................................................................................................. 3.0 × 10¥2 4.0 × 10¥3
TABLE C–3 OF SUBPART C—DEFAULT CH4 AND N2O EMISSION FACTORS FOR VARIOUS TYPES OF FUEL—Continued
Default CH4 Default N2O
Fuel type emission factor emission factor
(kg CH4/mmBtu) (kg N2O/mmBtu)
Petroleum Coke ........................................................................................................................................... 3.0 × 10¥3 6.0 × 10¥4

Propane ....................................................................................................................................................... 1.0 × 10¥3 1.0 × 10¥4
Refinery Gas ................................................................................................................................................ 9.0 × 10¥4 1.0 × 10¥4
Residual Fuel Oil ......................................................................................................................................... 3.0 × 10¥3 6.0 × 10¥4
Tites ............................................................................................................................................................. 3.0 × 10¥3 6.0 × 10¥4
Waste Oil ..................................................................................................................................................... 3.0 × 10¥2 4.0 × 10¥3
Waxes .......................................................................................................................................................... 3.0 × 10¥3 6.0 × 10¥4
Wood and Wood Waste .............................................................................................................................. 3.0 × 10¥2 4.0 × 10¥3
Note: Values were converted from LHV to HHV assuming that LHV are 5 percent lower than HHV for solid and liquid fuels and 10 percent
lower for gaseous fuels. Those employing this table are assumed to fall under the IPCC definitions of the ‘‘Energy Industry’’ or ‘‘Manufacturing In-
dustries and Construction’’. In all fuels except for coal the values for these two categories are identical. For coal combustion, those who fall with-
in the IPCC ‘‘Energy Industry’’ category may employ a value of 1 g of CH4/MMBtu.
Subpart D—Electricity Generation (b) For each unit that is not subject to Rain Program, the owner or operator of
the reporting requirements of the Acid a facility containing one or more
§ 98.40 Definition of the source category. Rain Program, the annual CO2, CH4, and electricity generating units shall meet
(a) The electricity generation source N2O mass emissions shall be calculated the data reporting and verification
category comprises all facilities with using the methods specified in § 98.33 requirements specified in § 98.36.
one or more electricity generating units, for stationary fuel combustion units.
including electricity generating units § 98.47 Records that must be retained.
that are subject to the requirements of § 98.44 Monitoring and QA/QC The owner or operator of a facility
the Acid Rain Program. requirements. containing one or more electricity
(b) This source category does not (a) For electricity generation units generating units shall meet the
include portable equipment or subject to the requirements of the Acid recordkeeping requirements of § 98.3(g)
generating units designated as Rain Program, the CO2 emissions data and, if applicable, § 98.37.
emergency generators in a permit issued shall be quality assured according to the
applicable procedures in appendices B, § 98.48 Definitions.
by a State or local air pollution control
agency. D, and G to part 75 of this chapter. All terms used in this subpart have
(b) For electricity generating units that the same meaning given in the Clean Air
§ 98.41 Reporting threshold. are not subject to the requirements of Act and subpart A of this part.
You must report GHG emissions the Acid Rain Program, the quality
under this subpart if your facility assurance and quality control Subpart E—Adipic Acid Production
contains one or more electricity procedures specified in § 98.34 for § 98.50 Definition of source category.
generating units and the facility meets stationary fuel combustion units shall The adipic acid production source
the requirements of either § 98.2(a)(1) or be followed. category consists of all adipic acid
(2). production facilities that use oxidation
§ 98.45 Procedures for estimating missing
§ 98.42 GHGs to report. data. to produce adipic acid.
The annual mass emissions of CO2, (a) For electricity generation units § 98.51 Reporting threshold.
N2O, and CH4 shall be reported for each subject to the requirements of the Acid You must report GHG emissions
electricity generating unit. Rain Program, the applicable missing under this subpart if your facility
data substitution procedures in part 75 contains an adipic acid production
§ 98.43 Calculating GHG emissions. of this chapter shall be followed for CO2
(a) For each electricity generating unit process and the facility meets the
concentration, stack gas flow rate, fuel requirements of either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2).
subject to the requirements of the Acid flow rate, gross calorific value (GCV),
Rain Program, the owner or operator and fuel carbon content. § 98.52 GHGs to report.
shall continue to monitor and report (b) For each electricity generating unit (a) You must report N2O process
CO2 mass emissions as required under that is not subject to the requirements of emissions from adipic acid production
§§ 75.13 and 75.64 of this chapter. CO2 the Acid Rain Program, the missing data as required by this subpart.
emissions for the purposes of the GHG substitution procedures specified in (b) You must report CO2, CH4, and
emissions reports required under § 98.35 for stationary fuel combustion N2O emissions from each stationary
§§ 98.3 and 98.36 shall be calculated as units shall be implemented. combustion unit that uses a carbon-
follows: based fuel, following the requirements
(1) The owner or operator shall § 98.46 Data reporting requirements.
of subpart C of this part.
convert the cumulative annual CO2 (a) For electricity generation units
mass emissions reported in the fourth subject to the requirements of the Acid § 98.53 Calculating GHG emissions.
quarter electronic data report required Rain Program, the owner or operator of You must determine annual N2O
under § 75.64 of this chapter from units a facility containing one or more emissions from adipic acid production
of short tons to metric tons. To convert electricity generating units shall meet using a facility-specific emission factor
tons to metric tons, divide by 1.1023. the data reporting requirements according to paragraphs (a) through (e)
(2) The annual CH4 and N2O mass specified in § 98.36(b) and, if applicable, of this section.
emissions shall be calculated using the § 98.36(c)(2) or (3). (a) You must conduct an annual
methods specified in § 98.33 for (b) For electricity generating units not performance test to measure N2O
stationary fuel combustion units. subject to the requirements of the Acid emissions from the waste gas streams of
each adipic acid oxidation process. You (b) You must conduct the emissions rate for the test period in metric tons per
must conduct the performance test test using the methods specified in hour.
under normal process operating § 98.54(b). (d) You must calculate an average
conditions. (c) You must measure the adipic acid facility-specific emission factor
production rate for the facility during according to Equation E–1 of this
the test and calculate the production section:
n
CN 2O ∗1.14 × 10−7 ∗ Q
∑ P
EFN 2O = 1 (Eq. E-1)
n
Where: 1.14x10¥7 = Conversion factor (lb/dscf-ppm (e) You must calculate annual adipic
EFN2O = Average facility-specific N2O N2O). acid production process emissions of
emissions factor (lb N2O/ton adipic acid Q = Volumetric flow rate of effluent gas N2O for the facility by multiplying the
produced). (dscf/hr). emissions factor by the total annual
CN2O = N2O concentration during P = Production rate during performance test adipic acid production at the facility,
performance test (ppm N2O). (tons adipic acid produced/hr). according to Equation E–2 of this
n = Number of test runs. section:
EFN2O ∗ Pa ∗ (1 − DFN ) ∗ AFN

EN 2 O = (Eq. E-2)
2205
Where: applicable EPA methods in 40 CFR part must contain the information specified
EN2O = N2O mass emissions per year (metric 60, appendices A–1 through A–4. in paragraphs (a) through (h) of this
tons of N2O). Conduct three emissions test runs of 1 section for each adipic acid production
EFN2O = Facility-specific N2O emission factor hour each. facility:
(lb N2O/ton adipic acid produced). (c) Each facility must conduct all (a) Annual N2O emissions from adipic
Pa = Total production for the year (ton adipic required performance tests according to
acid produced). acid production in metric tons.
DFN = Destruction factor of N2O abatement a test plan and EPA Method 320 in 40 (b) Annual adipic acid production
technology (abatement device CFR part 63, appendix A or ASTM capacity (in metric tons).
manufacturer’s specified destruction D6348–03 (incorporated by reference- (c) Annual adipic acid production, in
efficiency, percent of N2O removed from see § 98.7). All QA/QC procedures units of metric tons of adipic acid
air stream). specified in the reference test methods produced.
AFN = Abatement factor of N2O abatement and any associated performance (d) Number of facility operating hours
technology (percent of year that specifications apply. For each test, the in calendar year.
abatement technology was used). facility must prepare an emission factor
2205 = Conversion factor (lb/metric ton). (e) Emission rate factor used (lb N2O/
determination report that must include ton adipic acid).
§ 98.54 Monitoring and QA/QC the items in paragraphs (c)(1) through (f) Abatement technology used (if
requirements. (3) of this section: applicable).
(a) You must conduct a new (1) Analysis of samples, (g) Abatement technology efficiency
performance test and calculate a new determination of emissions, and raw (percent destruction).
facility-specific emissions factor at least data. (h) Abatement utilization factor
annually. You must also conduct a new (2) All information and data used to (percent of time that abatement system
performance test whenever the derive the emissions factor. is operating).
production rate is changed by more than (3) The production rate during the test
10 percent from the production rate and how it was determined. The § 98.57 Records that must be retained.
measured during the most recent production rate can be determined In addition to the information
performance test. The new emissions through sales records, or through direct required by § 98.3(g), you must retain
factor may be calculated using all measurement using flow meters or the records specified in paragraphs (a)
available performance test data (i.e., weigh scales. through (f) of this section at the facility
average with the data from previous § 98.55 Procedures for estimating missing level:
years), except in cases where process data. (a) Annual N2O emissions from adipic
modifications have occurred or Procedures for estimating missing acid production, in metric tons.
operating conditions have changed. data are not provided for N2O process (b) Annual adipic acid production
Only the data consistent with the emissions for adipic acid production capacity, in metric tons.
reporting period after the changes were facilities calculated according to § 98.53. (c) Annual adipic acid production, in
implemented shall be used. A complete record of all measured units of metric tons of adipic acid
(b) You must conduct each emissions parameters used in the GHG emissions produced.
EP10AP09.019</GPH>
test using EPA Method 320 in 40 CFR calculations is required. (d) Number of facility operating hours
part 63, Appendix A or ASTM D6348– in calendar year.
03 (incorporated by reference—see § 98.56 Data reporting requirements. (e) Measurements, records and
§ 98.7) to measure the N2O In addition to the information calculations used to determine the
EP10AP09.018</GPH>
concentration in conjunction with the required by § 98.3(c), each annual report annual production rate.
(f) Emission rate factor used and aluminum manufacturing process anode effects in all prebake and
supporting test or calculation comprises the following operations: S<derberg electrolysis cells.
information including the annual (1) Electrolysis in prebake and (b) Total CO2 emissions from anode
emission rate factor determination S<derberg cells. consumpton during electrolysis in all
report specified in § 98.54(c). This (2) Anode baking for prebake cells. prebake and S<derberg electrolysis cells.
report must be available upon request. (b) This source category does not (c) Total CO2 emissions from anode
include experimental cells or research baking for all prebake cells.
§ 98.58 Definitions. and development process units. (d) For CO2, N2O, and CH4 emissions
All terms used in this subpart have § 98.61 Reporting threshold. from stationary fuel combustion units,
the same meaning given in the Clean Air You must report GHG emissions you must follow the requirements in
Act and subpart A of this part. under this subpart if your facility subpart C of this part.
contains an aluminum production § 98.63 Calculating GHG emissions.
Subpart F—Aluminum Production
process and the facility meets the
requirements of either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2). (a) Use Equation F–1 of this section to
§ 98.60 Definition of the source category.
estimate CF4 emissions from anode
(a) A primary aluminum production § 98.62 GHGs to report. effects, and use Equation F–2 to
facility manufactures primary You must report: estimate C2F6 emissions from anode
aluminum using the Hall-Héroult (a) Total perfluoromethane (CF4), and effects from each prebake and S<derberg
manufacturing process. The primary perfluoroethane (C2F6) emissions from electrolysis cell.
E CF 4 = SCF 4 × AEM × MP × 0.001 (Eq. F-1)
Where: SCF4 = The slope coefficient ((kg CF4/metric MP = Metal production (metric tons Al).
ECF4 = Monthly CF4 emissions from ton Al)/(AE-Mins/cell-day)). where AEM and MP are calculated
aluminum production (metric tons CF4). AEM = The anode effect minutes per cell-day monthly.
(AE-Mins/cell-day).
E C 2 F6 = E CF 4 × FC 2 F6 / CF 4 × 0.001 (Eq. F-2)
Where: 0.001 = Conversion factor from kg to metric (1) For Prebake cells: You must
EC2F6 = Monthly C2F6 emissions from tons, where ECF4 is calculated monthly. calculate CO2 emissions from anode
aluminum production (metric tons C2F6). consumption using Equation F–3 of this
ECF4 = CF4 emissions from aluminum (b) Use the following procedures to
section:
production (kg CF4). calculate CO2 emissions from anode
FC2F6/CF4 = The weight fraction of C2F6/CF4 consumption during electrolysis:
(kg C2F6/kg CF4).
E CO 2 = NAC × MP × ([100 − Sa − Ash a ] /100 ) × (44 / 12) (Eq. F-3)
Where: MP = Total annual metal production (metric 44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to
ECO2 = Annual CO2 emissions from prebaked tons Al). carbon.
anode consumption (metric tons CO2). Sa = Sulfur content in baked anode (percent
NAC = Net annual prebaked anode weight). (2) For S<derberg cells you must
consumption per metric ton Al (metric Asha = Ash content in baked anode (percent calculate CO2 emissions using Equation
tons C/metric tons Al). weight). F–4 of this section:
E CO 2 = (PC x MP − [ CSM x MP ] /1000 − BC /100 × PC × EP10AP09.023</MATH>
MP × ⎡⎣Sp + Ash p + H p ⎤⎦ /100 − [100 − BC] /100 × PC × MP × (Eq. F-4)

[Sc + Ash c ] /100 − MP × CD × (44 /12)
EP10AP09.022</MATH>
Where: BC = Binder content of paste (percent CD = Carbon in skimmed dust from

ECO2 = Annual CO2 emissions from paste weight). S<derberg cells (metric ton C/metric ton
consumption (metric ton CO2). Sp = Sulfur content of pitch (percent weight). Al).
Ashp = Ash content of pitch (percent weight).
EP10AP09.021</MATH>
PC = Annual paste consumption (metric ton/ 44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to
Hp = Hydrogen content of pitch (percent
metric ton Al). carbon.
weight).
MP = Total annual metal production (metric Sc = Sulfur content in calcined coke (percent
ton Al). (c) Use the following procedures to
weight).
CSM = Annual emissions of cyclohexane Ashc = Ash content in calcined coke (percent calculate CO2 emissions from anode
EP10AP09.020</MATH>
soluble matter (kg/metric ton Al). weight). baking of prebake cells:
(1) Use Equation F–5 of this section to

calculate emissions from pitch
volatiles.
E CO 2 PV = ( GA − H w − BA − WT ) × (44 /12) (Eq. F-5)
Where: Hw = Annual hydrogen content in green 44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to
ECO2PV = Annual CO2 emissions from pitch anodes (metric tons). carbon.
volatiles combustion (metric tons CO2). BA = Annual baked anode production
(metric tons). (2) Use Equation F–6 of this section to
GA = Initial weight of green anodes (metric calculate emissions from bake furnace
WT = Annual waste tar collected (metric
tons). tons). packing material.
(
E CO 2 PC = PCC × BA × ⎡⎣100 − Spc − Ash pc ⎤⎦ /100 × (44 /12) ) (Eq. F-6)
Where: every 36 months in accordance with the § 98.65 Procedures for estimating missing
ECO2PC = Annual CO2 emissions from bake EPA/IAI Protocol for Measurement of data.
furnace packing material (metric tons Tetrafluoromethane and A complete record of all measured
CO2). Hexafluoroethane Emissions from parameters used in the GHG emissions
PCC = Annual packing coke consumption Primary Aluminum Production (2008). calculations is required. Therefore,
(metric tons/metric ton baked anode). (b) The minimum frequency of the whenever a quality-assured value of a
BA = Annual baked anode production measurement and analysis is annually required parameter is unavailable (e.g.,
(metric tons).
Spc = Sulfur content in packing coke (percent
except as follows: Monthly—anode if a meter malfunctions during unit
weight). effect minutes per cell day, production. operation or if a required sample
Ashpc = Ash content in packing coke (percent (c) Sources may use smelter-specific measurement is not taken), a substitute
weight). values from annual measurements of data value for the missing parameter
44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to parameters needed to complete the shall be used in the calculations,
carbon. equations in § 98.63 (e.g., sulfur, ash, according to the following requirements:
and hydrogen contents), or may use (a) Where anode or paste
§ 98.64 Monitoring and QA/QC
default values from Volume III, Section consumption data are missing, CO2
requirements.
4.4, in Chapter 4, of the 2006 IPCC emissions can be estimated from
(a) The smelter-specific slope Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas aluminum production using Tier 1
coefficient must be measured at least Inventories. method per Equation F–7 of this section.
ECO 2 = EFp x MPp + EFs x MPs (Eq. F-7)
Where: (1) Perfluoromethane emissions and and ash) that were used in the
ECO2 = CO2 emissions from anode and/or perfluoroethane emissions from anode calculation, on an annual basis.
paste consumption, tonnes CO2. effects in all prebake and all S<derberg (h) Exact data elements required will
EFp = Prebake technology specific emission electolysis cells combined.
factor (1.6 tonnes CO2/tonne aluminum vary depending on smelter technology
(2) Anode effect minutes per cell-day, (e.g., point-feed prebake or S<derberg).
produced).
anode effect frequency (AE/cell-day),
MPp = Metal production from prebake
process (tonnes Al). anode effect duration (minutes). § 98.67 Records that must be retained.
EFs = S<derberg technology specific emission (3) Smelter-specific slope coefficient In addition to the information
factor (1.7 tonnes CO2/tonne Al and the last date when the smelter- required by § 98.3(g), you must retain
produced). specific-slope coefficient was measured. the following records:
MPs = Metal production from S<derberg (d) Method used to measure the
process (tonnes Al). frequency and duration of anode effects. (a) Monthly aluminum production in
(e) The following CO2-specific metric tons.
(b) For other parameters, use the
average of the two most recent data information for prebake cells on an (b) Type of smelter technology used.
points. annual basis: (c) The following PFC-specific
(1) Total anode consumption. information on a monthly basis:
EP10AP09.026</GPH>
§ 98.66 Data reporting requirements. (2) Total CO2 emissions from the
smelter. (1) Perfluoromethane and
In addition to the information
(f) The following CO2-specific perfluoroethane emissions from anode
required by § 98.3(c), you must report
information for S<derberg cells on an effects in each prebake and S<derberg
the following information at the facility
annual basis: electolysis cells.
level:
EP10AP09.025</GPH>
(a) Annual aluminum production in (1) Total paste consumption. (2) Anode effect minutes per cell-day,
metric tons. (2) Total CO2 emissions from the anode effect frequency (AE/cell-day),
(b) Type of smelter technology used. smelter. anode effect duration (minutes) from
(c) The following PFC-specific (g) Smelter-specific inputs to the CO2 each prebake and S<derberg electolysis
EP10AP09.024</GPH>
information on an annual basis: process equations (e.g., levels of sulfur cells.
(3) Smelter-specific slope coefficient Subpart G—Ammonia Manufacturing must follow the requirements of 40 CFR
and the last date when the smelter- 98, subpart C (General Stationary Fuel
§ 98.70 Definition of source category. Combustion Sources).
specific-slope coefficient was measured.
The ammonia manufacturing source (c) For CO2 collected and used on site
(d) Method used to measure the category comprises the process units
frequency and duration of anode effects. or transferred off site, you must follow
listed in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this the requirements of subpart PP
(e) The following CO2-specific section. (Suppliers of CO2) of this part.
information for prebake cells on an (a) Ammonia manufacturing processes
annual basis: in which ammonia is manufactured § 98.73 Calculating GHG emissions.
from a fossil-based feedstock produced
(1) Total anode consumption. You must determine CO2 process
via steam reforming of a hydrocarbon.
(2) Total CO2 emissions from the (b) Ammonia manufacturing emissions in accordance with the
smelter. processes in which ammonia is procedures specified in either paragraph
manufactured through the gasification (a) or (b) of this section.
(f) The following CO2-specific
of solid raw material. (a) Any ammonia manufacturing
information for S<derberg cells on an
process unit that meets the conditions
annual basis: § 98.71 Reporting threshold. specififed in § 98.33(b)(5)(iii)(A), (B),
(1) Total paste consumption. You must report GHG emissions and (C), or § 98.33(b)(5)(ii)(A) through
(2) Total CO2 emissions from the under this subpart if your facility (F) shall calculate total CO2 emissions
smelter. contains an ammonia manufacturing using a continuous emissions
process and the facility meets the monitoring system according to the Tier
(g) Smelter-specific inputs to the CO2 requirements of either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2). 4 Calculation Methodology specified in
process equations (e.g., levels of sulfur § 98.33(a)(4).
and ash) that were used in the § 98.72 GHGs to report.
You must report: (b) If the facility does not measure
calculation, on an annual basis.
(a) Carbon dioxide (CO2) process total emissions with a CEMS, you must
(h) Exact data elements required will calculate the annual CO2 process
emissions from steam reforming of a
vary depending on smelter technology hydrocarbon or the gasification of solid emissions from feedstock used for
(e.g., point-feed prebake or S<derberg). raw material, reported for each ammonia manufacturing.
§ 98.68 Definitions. ammonia manufacturing process unit. (1) Gaseous feedstock. You must
(b) CO2, N2O, and CH4 emissions from calculate the total CO2 process
All terms used in this subpart have fuel combustion at ammonia emissions from gaseous feedstock
the same meaning given in the Clean Air manufacturing processes and any other according to Equation G–1 of this
Act and subpart A of this part. stationary fuel combustion units. You section:
⎛ 12 44 MW ⎞
CO 2 = ⎜ ∑ ∗ ( Fdstk )n ∗ (CC) n ∗ ⎟ ∗ 0.001 (Eq. G-1)
⎝ n=1 12 MVC ⎠
Where: results for month n (kg C per kg of 0.001 = Conversion factor from kg to metric
CO2 = Annual CO2 emissions arising from feedstock). tons.
feedstock consumption (metric tons). MW = Molecular weight of the gaseous
(Fdstk)n = Volume of the gaseous feedstock
feedstock (kg/kg-mole). (2) Liquid feedstock. You must
MVC = Molar volume conversion factor calculate the total CO2 process
used in month n (scf of feedstock). (849.5 scf per kg-mole at standard
(CC)n = Average carbon content of the emissions from liquid feedstock
conditions).
gaseous feedstock, from the analysis 44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to
according to Equation G–2 of this
carbon. section:
⎛ 12 44 ⎞
CO 2 = ⎜ v ∑ ∗ ( Fdstk )n ∗ (CC) n ⎟ ∗ 0.001 (Eq. G-2)
⎝ n =1 12 ⎠
Where: 44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to (3) Solid feedstock. You must
CO2 = Annual CO2 emissions arising from carbon. calculate the total CO2 process
feedstock consumption (metric tons). 0.001 = Conversion factor from kg to metric emissions from solid feedstock
(Fdstk)n = Volume of the liquid feedstock tons. according to Equation G–3 of this
EP10AP09.029</MATH>
used in month n (gallons of feedstock). (RCO2)n = CO2 captured or recovered for use
(CC)n = Average carbon content of the liquid section:
in urea or methanol production for
feedstock, from the analysis results for month n, kg CO2.
month n (kg C per gallon of feedstock).
EP10AP09.028</GPH>
⎛ 12 44 ⎞
CO 2 = ⎜ ∑ ∗ ( Fdstk )n ∗ (CC) n ⎟ ∗ 0.001 (Eq. G-3)
⎝ n =1 12 ⎠
EP10AP09.027</GPH>
Where: § 98.75 Procedures for estimating missing § 98.78 Definitions.

CO2 = Annual CO2 emissions arising from data.
All terms used in this subpart have
feedstock consumption (metric tons). A complete record of all measured the same meaning given in the Clean Air
(Fdstk)n = Mass of the solid feedstock used parameters used in the GHG emissions Act and subpart A of this part.
in month n (kg of feedstock). calculations is required. Therefore,
(CC)n = Average carbon content of the solid whenever a quality-assured value of a Subpart H—Cement Production
feedstock, from the analysis results for required parameter is unavailable (e.g.,
month n (kg C per kg of feedstock). if a meter malfunctions during unit § 98.80 Definition of the source category.
44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to operation), a substitute data value for The cement production source
carbon. the missing parameter shall be used in category consists of each kiln and each
0.001 = Conversion factor from kg to metric the calculations, according to the in-line kiln/raw mill at any portland
tons. requirements in paragraphs (a) and (b) cement manufacturing facility including
(RCO2)n = CO2 captured or recovered for use of this section.
in urea or methanol production for
alkali bypasses, and includes kilns and
(a) For missing feedstock supply rates, in-line kiln/raw mills that burn
month n, kg CO2. use the lesser of the maximum supply hazardous waste.
§ 98.74 Monitoring and QA/QC rate that the unit is capable of
requirements. processing or the maximum supply rate § 98.81 Reporting threshold.
that the meter can measure. You must report GHG emissions
(a) Facilities must continuously (b) There are no missing data under this subpart if your facility
measure the quantity of gaseous or procedures for carbon content. A re-test contains a cement production process
liquid feedstock consumed using a flow must be performed if the data from any and the facility meets the requirements
meter. The quantity of solid feedstock monthly measurements are determined of either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2).
consumed can be obtained from to be invalid.
company records and aggregated on a § 98.82 GHGs to report.
monthly basis. § 98.76 Data reporting requirements.
In addition to the information Carbon dioxide (CO2) process
(b) You must collect a sample of each required by § 98.3(c) of subpart A of this emissions from calcination, reported for
feedstock on a monthly basis and part, each annual report must contain all kilns combined.
analyze the carbon content using any the information specified in paragraphs CO2, N2O, and CH4 emissions from
suitable method incorporated by (a) through (c) for each ammonia fuel combustion at each kiln and any
reference in § 98.7. manufacturing process unit: other stationary combustion units, by
(c) All fuel flow meters and gas (a) Annual CO2 process emissions following the requirements of 40 CFR
composition monitors shall be (metric tons). 98, subpart C (General Stationary Fuel
calibrated prior to the first reporting (b) Total quantity of feedstock Combustion Sources).
year, using a suitable method published consumed for ammonia manufacturing.
by a consensus standards organization (c) Monthly analyses of carbon § 98.83 Calculating GHG emissions.
(e.g., ASTM, ASME, API, AGA, or content for each feedstock used in (a) Cement kilns that meet the
others). Alternatively, calibration ammonia manufacturing (kg carbon/kg conditions specified in § 98.33(b)(5)(ii)
procedures specified by the flow meter of feedstock). or (iii) shall calculate total CO2
manufacturer may be used. Fuel flow § 98.77 Records that must be retained. emissions using the Tier 4 Calculation
meters and gas composition monitors Methodology specified in § 98.33(a)(4).
In addition to the records required by
shall be recalibrated either annually or (b) If CEMS are not used to determine
§ 98.3(g), you must retain the records
at the minimum frequency specified by the total annual CO2 emissions from
specified in paragraphs (a) and (b) of
the manufacturer, whichever is more kilns, then you must calculate process
this section.
frequent. (a) Method used for determining CO2 emissions by following paragraphs
(d) You must document the quantity of feedstock used. (b)(1) through (3) of this section.
procedures used to ensure the accuracy (b) Monthly analyses of carbon (1) Calculate CO2 process emissions
of the estimates of feedstock content for each feedstock used in from all kilns at the facility using
consumption. ammonia manufacturing. Equation H–1 of this section:
k
CO 2 CMF = ∑ CO 2 cli , m + CO 2 rm (Eq. H-1)
m =1
Where: CO2 rm = Total annual emissions of CO2 from (2) CO2 emissions from clinker
CO2 CMF = Total annual emissions of CO2 raw materials, metric tons. production. Calculate CO2 emissions
from cement manufacturing, metric tons. k = Total number of kilns at a cement from each kiln using Equations H–2 and
CO2 Cli,m = Total annual emissions of CO2 manufacturing facility. H–3 of this section.
from clinker production from kiln m,
metric tons.
EP10AP09.031</MATH>
p r
CO 2 cli,m = ∑ ⎡⎣( Cli, j ) ∗ ( EFcli, j ) ⎤⎦ + ∑ ⎡⎣( CKD,i ) ∗ ( EFCKD,i ) ⎤⎦ (Eq. H-2)
j =1 i =1
EP10AP09.030</MATH>
Where: metric ton clinker computed as specified for quarter i from kiln m, as determined
Cli,j = Quantity of clinker produced in month in Equation H–3 of this section. in paragraph (c)(2)(i).
j from kiln m, metric tons. CKDi = Cement kiln dust (CKD) discarded in p = Number of months for clinker
quarter i from kiln m, metric tons. calculation, 12.
EFCli,j = Kiln specific clinker emission factor
EFCKD,i = Kiln specific fraction of calcined r = Number of quarters for CKD calculation,
for month j for kiln m, metric tons CO2/ material in CKD not recycled to the kiln, 4.
EFCli = ( CLiCaO − ClincCaO ) ∗ MRCaO + ( CliMgO − ClincMgO ) ∗ MRMgO (Eq. H-3)
Where: ClincMgO = Monthly non-carbonate MgO of used instead of testing to determine

CliCaO = Monthly CaO content of Clinker, Clinker, wt% as determined in EFCKD.
wt% as determined in § 98.84(b). § 98.84(b). (iii) The weight percents of CaO,
MRCaO = Molecular Ratio of CO2/CaO = (i) EFCKD must be determined through MgO, non-carbonate CaO, and non-
0.785. X-ray fluorescence (XRF) test or other carbonate MgO of clinker used in
CliMgO = Monthly MgO content of Clinker,
testing method specified in § 98.84(a), Equation H–3 must be determined using
wt% as determined in § 98.84(b).
MRMgO = Molecular Ratio of CO2/MgO = except as provided in paragraph the measurement methods specified in
1.092. (c)(2)(ii) of this section. § 98.84(b).
ClincCaO = Monthly non-carbonate CaO of (ii) A default factor of 1.0, which (3) CO2 emissions from raw materials.
Clinker, wt% as determined in assumes that 100 percent of all Calculate CO2 emissions using Equation
§ 98.84(b). carbonates in CKD are calcined, may be H–4 of this section:
CO 2 rm = rm ∗ TOCrm ∗ 3.664 (Eq. H-4)
Where: determined by direct weight (a) The total combined CO2 emissions
rm = The amount of raw material consumed measurement using the same plant from all kilns at the facility (in metric
annually, metric tons/yr. instruments used for accounting tons).
TOCrm = Organic carbon content of raw purposes, such as weigh hoppers or belt (b) Annual clinker production (tons).
material, as determined in § 98.84(c) or weigh feeders. (c) Number of kilns.
using a default factor of 0.2 percent of (d) Annual CKD production (in metric
total raw material weight. (e) The quantity of CKD discarded
quarterly by each kiln must be tons).
3.664 = The CO2 to carbon molar ratio.
determined by direct weight (e) Total annual fraction of CKD
§ 98.84 Monitoring and QA/QC measurement using the same plant recycled to the kilns (as a percentage).
requirements. instruments used for accounting (f) Annual weighted average carbonate
(a) You must determine the plant- purposes, such as weigh hoppers or belt composition (by carbonate).
specific fraction of calcined material in weigh feeders. (g) Annual weighted average fraction
cement kiln dust (CKD) not recycled to of calcination achieved (for each
(f) The quantity of each category of carbonate, percent).
the kiln (EFCKD) using an x-ray raw materials consumed annually by the
fluorescence test or other enhanced (h) Site-specific emission factor
facility (i.e. limestone, sand, shale, iron (metric tons CO2/metric ton clinker
testing method. The monitoring must be oxide, and alumina) must be determined
conducted quarterly for each kiln from produced).
by direct weight measurement using the (i) Organic carbon content of the raw
a CKD sample drawn from bulk CKD same plant instruments used for
storage. material (percent).
accounting purposes, such as weigh (j) Annual consumption of raw
(b) You must determine the weight hoppers or belt weigh feeders. material (metric tons).
percents of CaO, MgO, non-carbonate
§ 98.85 Procedures for estimating missing (k) Facilities that use CEMS must also
CaO, and non-carbonate MgO in clinker
data. comply with the data reporting
from each kiln using an x-ray
requirements specified in § 98.36(d)(iv).
fluorescence test or other enhanced If the CEMS approach is used to
testing method. The monitoring must be determine CO2 emissions, the missing § 98.87 Records that must be retained.
conducted monthly for each kiln from a data procedures in § 98.35 apply. In addition to the records required by
clinker sample drawn from bulk clinker Procedures for estimating missing data § 98.3(g), you must retain the records
storage. do not apply to CO2 process emissions specified in paragraphs (a) through (i) of
(c) The total organic carbon contents from cement manufacturing facilities this section for each portland cement
of raw materials must be determined calculated according to § 98.83(b). If manufacturing facility.
annually using ASTM Method C114–07 data on the carbonate content or organic (a) Monthly carbonate consumption.
or a similar ASTM method approved for carbon content is missing, facilities (b) Monthly clinker production (tons).
total organic carbon determination in must undertake a new analysis. (c) Monthly CKD production (in
raw mineral materials. The analysis metric tons).
must be conducted on sample material § 98.86 Data reporting requirements.
(d) Total annual fraction of CKD
EP10AP09.033</MATH>
drawn from bulk raw material storage In addition to the information recycled to the kiln (as a percentage).
for each category of raw material (i.e. required by § 98.3(b) of this part, each (e) Monthly analysis of carbonate
limestone, sand, shale, iron oxide, and annual report must contain the composition in clinker (by carbonate).
alumina). information specified in paragraphs (a) (f) Monthly analysis of fraction of
(d) The quantity of clinker produced through (k) of this section for each calcination achieved for CKD and each
EP10AP09.032</MATH>
monthly by each kiln must be portland cement manufacturing facility. carbonate.
(g) Monthly cement production. testing, and solder semiconductor Where:

(h) Documentation of calculated site- devices to circuit boards. etchBEk = Annual emissions of by-product
specific clinker emission factor. gas k from all etch processes (metric
(i) Facilities that use CEMS must also § 98.91 Reporting threshold. tons).
comply with the recordkeeping You must report GHG emissions BEkij = Annual emissions of by-product k
requirements specified in § 98.37. under this subpart if your facility formed from input gas i during etch
contains an electronics manufacturing process j (metric tons), calculated in
§ 98.88 Definitions. process and the facility meets the equation I–6.
All terms used in this subpart have requirements of either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2). (b) You shall calculate annual facility-
the same meaning given in the Clean Air level F–GHG emissions of each F–GHG
§ 98.92 GHGs to report.
Act and subpart A of this part. from all CVD chamber cleaning
(a) You shall report emissions of processes using Equations I–3 and I–4 of
Subpart I—Electronics Manufacturing nitrous oxide and fluorinated GHGs (as this section:
defined in § 98.6). The fluorinated GHGs
§ 98.90 Definition of the source category. that are emitted from electronics
(a) The electronics source category production processes include but are
cleanEi = ∑ Eij (Eq. I-3)
j
consists of any of the processes listed in not limited to those listed in Table I–1
paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of this of this subpart. You must report: Where:
section. Electronics manufacturing (1) Fluorinated GHGs from plasma cleanEi = Annual emissions of input gas i
facilities include but are not limited to etching. from all CVD cleaning processes (metric
facilities that manufacture (2) Fluorinated GHGs from chamber tons).
semiconductors, liquid crystal displays cleaning. Eij = Annual emissions of input gas i from
(3) Nitrous oxide from chemical vapor CVD cleaning process j (metric tons),
(LCD), microelectromechanical systems
calculated in equation I–5.
(MEMs), and photovoltaic (PV) cells. deposition.
(1) Each electronics manufacturing (4) Fluorinated GHGs from heat
production process in which the etching transfer fluid use. cleanBEk = ∑ ∑ BEkij (Eq. I-4)
j i
process uses plasma-generated fluorine (b) You shall report CO2, N2O and CH4
atoms, which chemically react with combustion-related emissions, if any, at Where:
exposed thin films (e.g., dielectric, electronics manufacturing facilities. For cleanBEk = Annual emissions of by-product
metals) and silicon to selectively stationary fuel combustion sources, gas k from all CVD cleaning processes
remove portions of material. follow the calculation procedures, (metric tons)
monitoring and QA/QC methods, BEkij = Annual emissions of by-product k
(2) Each electronics manufacturing
missing data procedures, reporting formed from input gas i during CVD
production process in which chambers cleaning process j (metric tons),
used for depositing thin films are requirements, and recordkeeping calculated in equation I–6.
cleaned periodically using plasma- requirements in subpart C of this part.
generated fluorine atoms from (c) You shall calculate annual facility-
§ 98.93 Calculating GHG emissions. level F–GHG emissions for each etching
fluorinated and other gases.
(3) Each electronics manufacturing (a) You shall calculate annual facility- process and each chamber cleaning
production process in which some level F–GHG emissions of each F–GHG process using Equations I–5 and I–6 of
fluorinated compounds can be from all etching processes using this section.
transformed in the plasma processes Equations I–1 and I–2 of this section: (1) Semiconductor facilities that have
into different fluorinated compounds an annual capacity of greater than
which are then exhausted, unless etchEi = ∑ Eij (Eq. I-1) 10,500 m2 silicon shall use process-
abated, into the atmosphere. j specific process utilization and by-
EP10AP09.039</MATH>
(4) Each electronics manufacturing Where: product formation factors determined as
production process in which the etchEi = Annual emissions of input gas i from specified in § 98.94(b).
chemical vapor deposition process uses all etch processes (2) All other electronics facilities shall
nitrous oxide. Eij = Annual emissions of input gas i from use the default emission factors for
(5) Each electronics manufacturing etch process j (metric tons), calculated in process utilization and by-production
EP10AP09.038</MATH>
production process in which fluorinated equation I–5. formation shown in Tables I–2, I–3, and
GHGs are used as heat transfer fluids I–4 of subpart I for semiconductor and
(HTFs) to cool process equipment, etchBEk = ∑ ∑ BEkij (Eq. I-2) MEMs, LCD, and PV manufacturing,
j i
control temperature during device respectively.
EP10AP09.037</MATH>
E ij = Cij ∗ (1 − U ij ) ∗ (1 − a ij ∗ d ij ) ∗ 0.001 (Eq. I-5)

EP10AP09.036</MATH>
Where: Uij = Process utilization rate for input gas i j (defined in Equation I–11). This is zero
Eij = Annual emissions of input gas i from during process j. unless the facility verifies the DRE of the
process j (metric tons). aij = Fraction of input gas i used in process device pursuant to § 98.94(c) of Subpart
j with abatement devices. I.
Cij = Amount of input gas i consumed in
dij = Fraction of input gas i destroyed in 0.001 = Conversion factor from kg to metric
process j, (kg).
EP10AP09.035</MATH>
abatement devices connected to process tons.
BEij = Bkij ∗ Cij ∗ (1 − aij ∗ d kj ) (Eq. I-6)

EP10AP09.034</MATH>
Where: process (j). This is zero unless the facility Where:

BEkij = Annual emissions of by-product k verifies the DRE of the device pursuant E(N2O) = Annual emissions of N2O (metric
formed from input gas i during process to § 98.94(c) of Subpart I. tons/year).
0.001 = Conversion factor from kg to metric
j (metric tons). CN2O = Annual Consumption of N2O (kg).
tons.
Bkij = Kg of gas k created as a by-product per 0.001 = Conversion factor from kg to metric
kg of input gas i consumed in process j. (d) You shall report annual N2O tons.
Cij = Amount of input gas i consumed in facility-level emissions during chemical
process j (kg). vapor deposition using Equation I–7 of (e) For facilities that use heat transfer
aij = Fraction of input gas i used in process this section. fluids, you shall report the annual
j with abatement devices. emissions of fluorinated GHG heat
dkj = Fraction of by-product gas k destroyed E ( N 2 O ) = C N2O x 0.001 (Eq. I-7) transfer fluids using Equation I–8 of this
in abatement devices connected to section.
EH i = density ∗ [ I io + Pit − N it + Rit − I it − Dit ∗ 0.001] (Eq. I-8)
Where: Rit = Total nameplate capacity [charge] of § 98.94 Monitoring and QA/QC
EHi = Emissions of fluorinated GHG heat equipment that contains heat transfer requirements.
transfer fluid i, (metric tons/year). fluid i and that is retired during the (a) You must estimate gas
Density = Density of heat transfer fluid i (kg/ current reporting period. consumption according to the
l). Iit = Inventory of heat transfer fluid i at the requirements in paragraph (a)(1) or
Iio = Inventory of heat transfer fluid i at the end of current reporting period (l). (a)(2) of this section for each process or
end of previous reporting period (l). Dit = Amount of heat transfer fluid i process type, as appropriate.
Pit = Net purchases of heat transfer fluid i recovered and sent off site during current (1) Monitor changes in container mass
during the current reporting period (l). reporting period, (l). and inventories for each gas using weigh
Nit = Total nameplate capacity [charge] of 0.001 = Conversion factor from kg to metric scales with an accuracy and precision of
equipment that contains heat transfer tons. one percent of full scale or better.
fluid i and that is installed during the Calculate the gas consumption using
current reporting period. Equation I–9 of this section.
Ci = I Bi − I Ei + A − D ∗ 0.001 (Eq. I-9)
Where: measured using the International (i) Measure the concentrations of F–

Ci = Annual consumption of input gas i SEMATECH Manufacturing Initiative’s GHGs exiting the process tool and
(metric tons/year). Guideline for Environmental entering and exiting the abatement
IBi = Inventory of input gas i stored in Characterization of Semiconductor system under operating process and
cylinders or other containers at the Process Equipment. You may use
beginning of the year, including heels
abatement system conditions that are
fluorinated GHG utilization rates and representative of those for which F–
(kg).
IEi = Inventory of input gas i stored in
by-product emission factors measured GHG emissions are estimated and
cylinders or other containers at the end by manufacturing equipment suppliers abatement-system DRE is used for the
of the year, including heels (kg). if the conditions in paragraph (b)(1) and F–GHG reporting period.1
A = Acquisitions of that gas during the year (2) of this section are met.
through purchases or other transactions, (1) The manufacturing equipment (ii) Measure the dilution through the
including heels in cylinders or other supplier has measured the GHG abatement system and calculate the
containers returned to the electronics utilization rates and by-product dilution factor under the representative
production facility (kg). emission factors using the International operating conditions given in paragraph
D = Disbursements of gas through sales or (c)(i) of this section by using the tracer
SEMATECH Guideline.
other transactions during the year, method. This method consists of
including heels in cylinders or other (2) The conditions under which the
containers returned by the electronics measurements were made are injecting known flows of a non-reactive
production facility to the gas distributor representative of your facility’s F–GHG gas (such as krypton) at the inlet of the
(kg). emitting processes. abatement system, measuring the time-
0.001 = Conversion factor from kg to metric (c) If your facility employs abatement averaged concentrations of krypton
tons. devices and you wish to reflect the entering ([Kr]in) and exiting ([Kr]out) the
(2) Monitor the mass flow of the pure emission reductions due to these abatement system, and calculating the
devices in § 98.93(c), you must verify dilution factor (DF) as the ratio of the
EP10AP09.042</MATH>
gas into the system using flowmeters.

The flowmeters must have an accuracy the destruction or removal efficiency time-averaged measured krypton
and precision of one percent of full (DRE) of the devices using the methods concentrations entering and exiting the
scale or better. in either paragraph (c)(1) or (2) of this abatement system, using equation I–10
(b) If you use fluorinated GHG section. of this section.
EP10AP09.041</MATH>
utilization rates and by-product (1) Experimentally determine the

emission factors other than the defaults effective dilution through the abatement
in Tables I–2, I–3, or I–4 of Subpart I, device and measure abatement DRE 1 Abatement system means a point-of-use (POU)
you must use fluorinated GHG during actual or simulated process abatement system whereby a single abatement
utilization rates and by-product conditions by following the procedures system is attached to a single process tool or single
EP10AP09.040</MATH>
emission factors that have been of this paragraph. process chamber of a multi-chamber tool.
[ Kr ] in Process Equipment when estimating § 98.95

data.
Procedures for estimating missing
DF = (Eq. I-10) facility-specific gas process utilization
[ Kr ] out and by-product gas formation. (a) For semiconductor facilities that
(2) You shall follow the QA/QC have an annual capacity of greater than
(iii) Measure the F–GHG procedures in the EPA DRE 10,500 m2 silicon, you shall estimate
concentrations in and out of the device measurement protocol when estimating missing site-specific gas process
with all process chambers connected to abatement device DRE. utilization and by-product formation
the F–GHG abatement system and under (3) You shall certify that abatement using default factors from Tables I–2
the production and abatement system devices are maintained in accordance through I–4 of this subpart. However,
conditions for which F–GHG emissions with manufacturer specified guidelines. use of these default factors shall be
are estimated for the reporting period.2 (4) You shall certify that gas restricted to less than 5 percent of the
(iv) Calculate abatement system DRE
consumption is tracked to a high degree total facility emissions.
using Equation I–11 of this section,
of precision as part of normal facility (b) For facilities using heat transfer
where it is assumed that the
operations and that further QA/QC is fluids and missing data for one or more
measurement pressure and temperature
not required. of the parameters in Equation I–8, you
at the inlet and outlet of the abatement
system are identical and where the (f) You shall adhere to the QA/QC shall estimate heat transfer fluid
relative precision (e) of the quantity procedures of this paragraph when emissions using the arithmetic average
ci¥out*DF/ci¥in shall not exceed ±10 estimating F–GHG emissions from heat of the emission rates for the year
percent (two standard deviations) using transfer fluid use: immediately preceding the period of
proper statistical methods. (1) You shall review all inputs to missing data and the months
Equation I–4 of this section to ensure immediately following the period of
DF ∗ ci − out that all inputs and outputs to the missing data. Alternatively, you may
dij = 1 − (Eq. I -11) facility’s system are accounted for. estimate missing information using
ci −in (2) You shall not enter negative inputs records from the heat transfer fluid
Where: into the mass balance Equation I–4 of supplier. You shall document the
dij = Destruction or removal efficiency (DRE) this section and shall ensure that no method used and values estimated for
ci¥in = Concentration of gas i in the inflow negative emissions are calculated. all missing data values.
to the abatement system (ppm). (3) You shall ensure that the (c) If the methods specified in
ci¥out = Concentration of gas i in the outflow beginning of year inventory matches the paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section are
from the abatement system (ppm). end of year inventory from previous likely to significantly under- or
DF = Dilution Factor calculated using year. overestimate the value of the parameter
Equation I–10.
(g) All flowmeters, scales, load cells, during the period when data were
(v) The DF may not be obtained by and volumetric and density measures missing (e.g., because the monitoring
calculation from flows other than those used to measure quantities that are to be failure was linked to a process
obtained by using the tracer method reported under § 98.92 and § 98.96 shall disturbance that is likely to have
described in paragraph (ii) of this be calibrated using suitable NIST- significantly increased the F–GHG
section. traceable standards and suitable emission rate), you shall develop a best
(2) Install abatement devices that have methods published by a consensus estimate of the parameter, documenting
been tested by a third party (e.g., UL) standards organization (e.g., ASTM, the methods used, the rationale behind
according to EPA’s Protocol for ASME, ASHRAE, or others). them, and the reasons why the methods
Measuring Destruction or Removal Alternatively, calibration procedures specified in paragraphs (a) and (b) of
Efficiency (DRE) of Fluorinated specified by the flowmeter, scale, or this section would lead to a significant
Greenhouse Gas Abatement Equipment load cell manufacturer may be used. under-or overestimate of the parameter.
in Electronics Manufacturing. This Calibration shall be performed prior to
testing may be obtained by the § 98.96 Data reporting requirements.
the first reporting year. After the initial
manufacturer of the equipment. calibration, recalibration shall be In addition to the information
(d) Abatement devices must be performed at least annually or at the required by § 98.3(c), you shall include
operated within the manufacturer’s minimum frequency specified by the in each annual report the following
specified equipment lifetime and gas manufacturer, whichever is more information for each electronics
flow and mix limits and must be frequent. manufacturer.
maintained according to the (h) All instruments (e.g., mass (a) Emissions of each GHG emitted
manufacturer’s guidelines. spectrometers and fourier transform from all plasma etching processes, all
(e) You shall adhere to the QA/QC chamber cleaning, all chemical vapor
infrared measuring systems) used to
procedures of this paragraph when deposition processes, and all heat
determine the concentration of
estimating F–GHG and N2O emissions transfer fluid use, respectively.
fluorinated greenhouse gases in process
from cleaning/etching processes: (b) The method, mass of input F–GHG
streams shall be calibrated just prior to
(1) You shall follow the QA/QC gases, and emission factors used for
DRE, gas utilization, or product
procedures in the International estimating F–GHG emissions.
formation measurement through
SEMATECH Manufacturing Initiative’s
analysis of certified standards with (c) Production in terms of substrate
Guideline for Environmental
known concentrations of the same surface area (e.g., silicon, PV-cell, LCD).
Characterization of Semiconductor
chemicals in the same ranges (fractions (d) Factors used for gas process
2 Most process tools have multiple chambers. For by mass) as the process samples. utilization and by-product formation,
EP10AP09.044</MATH>
combustion-type abatement systems, the outlets of Calibration gases prepared from a high- and the source and uncertainty for each
each chamber separately enter the destruction- concentration certified standard using a factor.
reactor because premixing of certain gaseous gas dilution system that meets the (e) The verified DRE and its
mixtures may be conducive to fire or explosion. For
the less-frequently used plasma-type POU
requirements specified in Test Method uncertainty for each abatement device
abatement systems, there is one system per 205, 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix M may used, if you have verified the DRE
EP10AP09.043</MATH>
chamber. also be used. pursuant to § 98.94(c).
(f) Fraction of each gas fed into each (b) Documentation for the values used that the DRE was calculated using the
process type with abatement devices. for GHG utilization rates and by-product formula given in § 98.94(c)(1)(iv).
(g) Description of abatement devices, emission factors, including (3) Documentation of the measured
including the number of devices of each documentation that these were flows, concentrations and calculations
manufacturer and model. measured using the the International
used to calculate DF, relative precision
(h) For heat transfer fluid emissions, SEMATECH Manufacturing Initiative’s
(e), and DRE.
inputs in the mass-balance Equation. Guideline for Environmental
(i) Example calculations for F–GHG, Characterization of Semiconductor (d) The date and results of the initial
N2O, and heat transfer fluid emissions. Process Equipment. and any subsequent tests to determine
(j) Estimate of the overall uncertainty (c) The date and results of the initial process tool gas utilization and by-
in the emissions estimate. and any subsequent tests of emission product formation factors.
control device DRE, including the (e) Abatement device calibration and
§ 98.97 Records that must be retained. following information:
In addition to the information maintenance records.
(1) Dated certification, by the
required by § 98.3(g), you must retain technician who made the measurement, § 98.98 Definitions.
the following records: that the dilution factor was determined
(a) Data used to estimate emissions using the tracer method. All terms used in this subpart have
including all spreadsheets and copies of (2) Dated certification, by the the same meaning given in the Clean Air
calculations used to estimate emissions. technician who made the measurement, Act and subpart A of this part.
TABLE I–1 OF SUBPART I—GHGS TYPICALLY USED BY THE ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY

Product type F–GHGs Used during manufacture
Electronics ....................................... CF4, C2F6, C3F8, c-C4F8, c-C4F8O, C4F6, C5F8, CHF3, CH2F2, NF3, SF6, and HTFs (CF3-(O-CF(CF3)-
CF2)n-(O-CF2)m-O-CF3, CnF2n+2, CnF2n+1(O)CmF2m+1, CnF2nO, (CnF2n+1)3N)
TABLE I–2 OF SUBPART I—DEFAULT EMISSION FACTORS FOR SEMICONDUCTOR AND MEMS MANUFACTURING
Factors
Process gases
Etch 1-Ui CVD 1-Ui Etch BCF4 Etch BC2F6 CVD BCF4 CVD BC3F8
CF4 ........................................................... 0.7 0.9 NA NA NA NA

C2F6 .......................................................... 0.4* 0.6 0.4* NA 0.1 NA
CHF3 ........................................................ 0.4* NA 0.07* NA NA NA
CH2F2 ....................................................... 0.06* NA 0.08* NA NA NA
C3F8 .......................................................... NA 0.4 NA NA 0.1 NA
c-C4F8 ....................................................... 0.2* 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 NA
NF3 ........................................................... NA 0.02 NA NA † 0.02 NA
Remote
NF3 ........................................................... 0.2 0.2 NA NA † 0.1 NA
SF6 ........................................................... 0.2 NA NA NA NA NA
C4F6a ........................................................ 0.1 NA 0.3* 0.2* NA NA
C5F8a ........................................................ 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 NA
C4F8Oa ...................................................... NA 0.1 NA NA 0.1 0.4
Notes: NA denotes not applicable based on currently available information.
* Estimate includes multi-gas etch processes.
† Estimate reflects presence of low-k, carbide and multi-gas etch processes that may contain a C-containing FC additive.
TABLE I–3 OF SUBPART I—DEFAULT EMISSION FACTORS FOR LCD MANUFACTURING

Factors
Process gases Etch CVD Etch Etch Etch
1-Ui 1-Ui BCF4 BCHF3 BC2F6
CF4 ....................................................................................... 0.6 NA NA NA NA

C2F6 ...................................................................................... NA NA NA NA NA
CHF3 .................................................................................... 0.2 NA 0.07 NA 0.05
CH2F2 ................................................................................... NA NA NA NA NA
C3F8 ...................................................................................... NA NA NA NA NA
c-C4F8 ................................................................................... 0.1 NA 0.009 0.02 NA
NF3 Remote ......................................................................... NA 0.03 NA NA NA
NF3 ....................................................................................... NA 0.3 NA NA NA
SF6 ....................................................................................... 0.3 0.9 NA NA NA
TABLE I–4 OF SUBPART I—DEFAULT EMISSION FACTORS FOR PV MANUFACTURING

Factors
Process gases Etch CVD Etch Etch CVD
1-Ui 1-Ui BCF4 BC2F6 BCF4
CF4 ....................................................................................... 0.7 NA NA NA NA

C2F6 ...................................................................................... 0.4 0.6 0.2 NA 0.2
CHF3 .................................................................................... 0.4 NA NA NA NA
CH2F2 ................................................................................... NA NA NA NA NA
C3F8 ...................................................................................... NA 0.1 NA NA 0.2
c-C4F8 ................................................................................... 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
NF3 Remote ......................................................................... NA NA NA NA NA
NF3 ....................................................................................... NA 0.3 NA NA NA
SF6 ....................................................................................... 0.4 0.4 NA NA NA
Subpart J—Ethanol Production the calculation procedures, monitoring the production of any ferroalloy listed
and QA/QC methods, missing data in Table K–1 of this subpart.
§ 98.100 Definition of the source category. procedures, reporting requirements, and (c) You must report the CO2, CH4, and
An ethanol production facility is a recordkeeping requirements of subpart N2O emissions from each stationary
facility that produces ethanol from the II of this part. combustion unit following the
fermentation of sugar, starch, grain, or
§ 98.103 Definitions. requirements specified in subpart C of
cellulosic biomass feedstocks; or
All terms used in this subpart have this part.
produces ethanol synthetically from
ethylene or hydrogen and carbon the same meaning given in the Clean Air § 98.113 Calculating GHG emissions.
monoxide. Act and subpart A of this part.
(a) If you operate and maintain a
§ 98.101 Reporting threshold. Subpart K—Ferroalloy Production CEMS that measures total CO2
You must report GHG emissions § 98.110 Definition of the source category.
emissions consistent with the
under this subpart if your facility requirements in subpart C of this part,
The ferroalloy production source
contains an ethanol production process you must estimate total CO2 emissions
category consists of any facility that
and the facility meets the requirements according to the requirements in
uses pyrometallurgical techniques to
of either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2). § 98.33.
produce any of the following metals:
§ 98.102 GHGs to report. ferrochromium, ferromanganese, (b) If you do not operate and maintain
You must report: ferromolybdenum, ferronickel, a CEMS that measures total CO2 process
(a) Emissions of CO2, N2O, and CH4 ferrosilicon, ferrotitanium, emissions consistent with the
from on-site stationary combustion. You ferrotungsten, ferrovanadium, requirements in subpart C, you must
must follow the calculation procedures, silicomanganese, or silicon metal. determine using the procedure specified
monitoring and QA/QC methods, in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this
§ 98.111 Reporting threshold. section the total CO2 emissions from all
missing data procedures, reporting You must report GHG emissions
requirements, and recordkeeping electric arc furnaces that are used for
under this subpart if your facility ferroalloy production.
requirements of subpart C of this part. contains a ferroalloy production process
(b) Emissions of CH4 from on-site and the facility meets the requirements (1) For each EAF at your facility used
landfills. You must follow the of either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2). for ferroalloy production, you must
calculation procedures, monitoring and determine the mass of carbon in each
QA/QC methods, missing data § 98.112 GHGs to report. carbon-containing input and output
procedures, reporting requirements, and (a) You must report the CO2 emissions material for the electric arc furnace for
recordkeeping requirements of subpart from each electric arc furnace used for each calendar month using Equation K–
HH of this part. ferroalloy production. 1 of this section. Carbon containing
(c) Emissions of CH4 from on-site (b) You must report the CH4 emissions input materials include carbon eletrodes
wastewater treatment. You must follow from each electric arc furnace used for and carbonaceous reducing agents.
44 12 ⎛ ⎞
E CO 2 = × ∑ ⎜ ∑ M reducing agenti × Creducing agenti ⎟
12 n =1 ⎝ i ⎠n
44 12 ⎛ ⎞
+ × ∑ ⎜ ∑ M electrodem × Celectrodem ⎟
12 n =1 ⎝ m ⎠n
44 12 ⎛ ⎞
+ × ∑ ⎜ ∑ M oreh × Coreh ⎟ (Eq. K-1)
12 n =1 ⎝ h ⎠n
44 12 ⎛ ⎞
+ × ∑ ⎜⎜ ∑ M flux j × Cflux j ⎟⎟
12 n =1 ⎝ j ⎠n
44 12 ⎛ ⎞
− × ∑ ⎜ ∑ M product k × Cproduct k ⎟
12 n =1 ⎝ k ⎠n
44 12 ⎛ ⎞
− × ∑ ⎜ ∑ M non-product outgoingl × C non-product outgoing1 ⎟
12 n =1 ⎝ l ⎠n
Where: Celectrodem = Carbon content of the carbon Mproductk = Mass of alloy product k tapped
ECO2 = Annual CO2 mass emissions from an electrode m, percent by weight, from EAF, metric tons.
individual EAF, metric tons. expressed as a decimal fraction. Cproductk = Carbon content in alloy product k,
Moreh = Mass of ore h charged to the EAF, metric tons of C/metric ton product.
Mreducing agenti = Mass of reducing agent i fed,
metric tons. Mnon-product outgoingl = Mass of non-product
charged, or otherwise introduced into outgoing material l removed from EAF,
the EAF, metric tons. Coreh = Carbon content in ore h, metric tons
metric tons.
Creducing agenti = Carbon content in reducing of C/metric ton ore.
Cnon-product outgoingl = Carbon content in non-
agent i, metric tons of C/metric ton Mfluxj = Mass of flux material j fed, charged, product outgoing material l, metric tons
reducing agent. or otherwise introduced into the EAF to of C/metric ton.
Melectrodem = Mass of carbon electrode m facilitate slag formation, metric tons.
Cfluxj = Carbon content in flux material j, (2) You must determine the total CO2
consumed in the EAF, metric tons. emissions from the electric arc furnaces using
metric tons of C/metric ton material.
Equation K–2 of this section:
k
CO 2 = ∑ E CO 2k (Eq. K-2)
1
Where: k = Total number of EAFs at facility used for CH4 emissions using the procedure
CO2 = Total annual CO2 emissions, metric the ferroalloy production. specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of
tons/year. (c) For the electric arc furnaces used this section.
ECO2k = Annual CO2 emissions calcaluated at your facility for the production of any (1) For each EAF, calculate annual
using Equation K–1 of this supart, metric ferroalloy listed in Table K–1 of this CH4 emissions using Equation K–3 of
tons/year. subpart, you must determine the total this section:
i
(
E CH 4 = ∑ M producti × EFproducti ) (Eq. K-3)
EP10AP09.048</MATH>
1
Where: j § 98.114 Monitoring and QA/QC

ECH4 = Annual CH4 emissions from an CH 4 = ∑ E CH 4 j (Eq. K-4) requirements.
EP10AP09.047</MATH>
individual EAF, metric tons. 1

If you determine CO2 emissions using
Mproducti = Annual mass of alloy product i Where: the carbon balance procedure in
produced in the EAF, metric tons. CH4 = Total annual CH4 emissions, metric § 98.113(b), you must meet the
EFproducti = CH4 emission factor for alloy tons/year. requirements specified in paragraphs (a)
product i from Table K–1 of this subpart, ECH4j = Annual CH4 emissions from EAF k through (c) of this section.
EP10AP09.046</MATH>
kg of CH4 emissions per metric ton of calculated using Equation K–3 of this
alloy product i. (a) Determine the mass of each solid
section, metric tons/year.
carbon-containing process input and
j = Total number of EAFs at facility used for
(2) You must determine the total CH4 output material by direct measurements
the production of ferroalloys listed in
emissions using Equation K–4 of this or calculations using process operating
Table K–1 of this subpart.
EP10AP09.045</MATH>
section: information, and record the total mass
of each material consumed or produced assured data are available prior to the § 98.117 Records that must be retained.
for each calendar month. missing data incident, the substitute In addition to the records required by
(b) For each process input and output data value shall be the first quality- § 98.3(g) of this part, you must retain the
material identified in paragraph (a) of assured value obtained after the missing records specified in paragraphs (a)
this section, you must determine the data period. through (e) of this section.
average carbon content of the material (b) For missing records of the mass of
carbon-containing input or output (a) Monthly facility production
for the specified period using
material consumption, the substitute quantity for each ferroalloy product (in
information provided by your material
data value shall be the best available metric tons).
supplier or by collecting and analyzing
a representative sample of the material. estimate of the mass of the input or (b) Number of facility operating hours
(c) For each input material identified output material. The owner or operator each month.
in paragraph (a) of this section for shall document and keep records of the (c) If you use the carbon balance
which the carbon content is not procedures used for all such estimates. procedure, record for each carbon-
provided by your material supplier, the (c) If you are required to calculate CH4 containing input and output material
carbon content of the material must be emissions for the electric arc furnace as consumed or used (other than fuel), the
analyzed by an independent certified specified in § 98.113(c), then you are information specified in paragraphs
laboratory at least annually using the required to have 100 percent of the (c)(1) and (2) of this section.
test methods (and their QA/QC specified data for each reporting period. (1) Monthly material quantity (in
procedures) in § 98.7. Use ASTM § 98.116 Data reporting requirements. metric tons).
E1941–04 (‘‘Standard Test Method for In addition to the information (2) Monthly average carbon content
Determination of Carbon in Refractory required by § 98.3(c), each annual report determined for material and records of
and Reactive Metals and Their Alloys’’) must contain the information specified the supplier provided information or
for analysis of metal ore and alloy in paragraphs (a) through (f) of this analyses used for the determination.
product; ASTM D5373–02 (‘‘Standard section. (d) You must keep records that
Test Methods for Instrumental (a) Annual CO2 emissions from each include a detailed explanation of how
Determination of Carbon, Hydrogen, and electric arc furnace used for ferroalloy company records of measurements are
Nitrogen in Laboratory Samples of Coal production, in metric tons and the used to estimate the carbon input input
and Coke’’) for analysis of carbonaceous method used to estimate these and output to each electric arc furnace.
reducing agents and carbon electrodes, emissions. You also must document the procedures
and ASTM C25–06 (‘‘Standard Test (b) Annual CH4 emissions from each used to ensure the accuracy of the
Methods for Chemical Analysis of electric arc furnace used for the measurements of materials fed, charged,
Limestone, Quicklime, and Hydrated production of any ferroalloy listed in or placed in an affected unit including,
Lime’’) for analysis of flux materials Table K–1 of this subpart. but not limited to, calibration of
such as limestone or dolomite. (c) Facility ferroalloy product weighing equipment and other
production capacity (metric tons). measurement devices. The estimated
§ 98.115 Procedures for estimating
(d) Annual facility production
missing data. accuracy of measurements made with
quantity for each ferroalloy product
For the carbon input procedure in these devices must also be recorded,
(metric tons).
§ 98.113(b), a complete record of all (d) Number of facility operating hours and the technical basis for these
measured parameters used in the GHG in calendar year. estimates must be provided.
emissions calculations is required (e.g., (f) If you use the carbon balance (e) If you are required to calculate CH4
raw materials carbon content values, procedure, report for each carbon- emissions for the electric arc furnace as
etc.). Therefore, whenever a quality- containing input and output material specified in § 98.113(c), you must
assured value of a required parameter is consumed or used (other than fuel), the maintain records of the total amount of
unavailable, a substitute data value for information specified in paragraphs each alloy product produced for the
the missing parameter shall be used in (g)(1) and (2) of this section. specified reporting period, and the
the calculations. (1) Annual material quantity (in appropriate alloy-product specific
(a) For each missing value of the metric tons). emission factor used to calculate CH4
carbon content the substitute data value (2) Annual average of the monthly emissions.
shall be the arithmetic average of the carbon content determinations for each
quality-assured values of that parameter material and the method used for the § 98.118 Definitions.
immediately preceding and immediately determination (e.g., supplier provided All terms used in this subpart have
following the missing data incident. If, information, analyses of representative the same meaning given in the Clean Air
for a particular parameter, no quality- samples you collected). Act and subpart A of this part.
TABLE K–1 OF SUBPART K—ELECTRIC ARC FURNACE (EAF) CH4 EMISSION FACTORS
CH4 Emission factor
(kg CH4 per metric ton product)
EAF operation
Alloy product produced in EAF
Sprinkle-
Sprinkle-
Batch-charging charging and
charging a >750 ° Cb
silicon metal ................................................................................................................................. 1.5 1.2 0.7

ferrosilicon 90% ........................................................................................................................... 1.4 1.1 0.6
ferrosilicon 75% ........................................................................................................................... 1.3 1.0 0.5
TABLE K–1 OF SUBPART K—ELECTRIC ARC FURNACE (EAF) CH4 EMISSION FACTORS—Continued
CH4 Emission factor
(kg CH4 per metric ton product)
EAF operation
Alloy product produced in EAF
Sprinkle-
Sprinkle-
Batch-charging charging and
charging a >750 ° Cb
ferrosilicon 65% ........................................................................................................................... 1.3 1.0 0.5

a Sprinkle-charging
is charging intermittently every minute.
b Temperature measured in off-gas channel downstream of the furnace hood.
Subpart L—Fluorinated Greenhouse (b) You must report the total mass of n m
Gas Production each fluorinated GHG emitted from each EBk = ∑ ∑ EBkip (Eq. L-2)
fluorinated GHG production process p =1 i =1
§ 98.120 Definition of the source category. and from all fluorinated GHG Where:
The fluorinated gas production source production processes at the facility. EBk = Total mass of fluorinated GHG by-
category consists of facilities that
§ 98.123 Calculating GHG emissions. product k emitted annually from all
produce a fluorinated GHG from any
production processes (metric tons).
raw material or feedstock chemical. (a) The total mass of each fluorinated EBkip = Total mass of fluorinated GHG by-
Producing a fluorinated GHG does not GHG product emitted annually from all product k emitted from production
include the reuse or recycling of a fluorinated GHG production processes process i over the period p (metric tons,
fluorinated GHG or the generation of shall be estimated by using Equation L– defined in Equation L–8 on this section).
HFC–23 during the production of 1 of this section: n = Number of concentration and flow
HCFC–22.
measurement periods for the year.
n m
m = Number of production processes.
E p = ∑ ∑ EPip
(Eq. L-1)
You must report GHG emissions p =1 i =1 (c) The total mass of each fluorinated
under this subpart if your facility
contains a fluorinated greenhouse gas Where: GHG product emitted from production
production process and the facility EP = Total mass of each fluorinated GHG process i over the period p shall be
meets the requirements of either product emitted annually from all estimated at least daily by calculating
§ 98.2(a)(1) or (2). production processes (metric tons). the difference between the expected
EPip = Total mass of the fluorinated GHG production of the fluorinated GHG
§ 98.122 GHGs to report. product emitted from production process based on the consumption of reactants
(a) You must report the CO2, N2O, and i over the period p (metric tons, defined
in Equation L–3 of this section).
(e.g., HF and a chlorocarbon reactant)
CH4 emissions from each on-site and the measured production of the
n = Number of concentration and flow
stationary combustion unit. For these measurement periods for the year. fluorinated GHG, accounting for yield
stationary combustion units, you must m = Number of production processes. losses related to by-products and
follow the applicable calculation wastes. This calculation shall be
procedures, monitoring and QA/QC (b) The total mass of fluorinated GHG performed for each reactant, using
methods, missing data procedures, by-product k emitted annually from all Equation L–3 of this section. Estimated
reporting requirements, and fluorinated GHG production processes emissions shall equal the average of the
recordkeeping requirements of subpart shall be estimated by using Equation L– results obtained for each reactant.
C of this part. 2 of this section:
R ∗ MWP ∗ SCP q u
EPip = − P − ∑ ( C p ∗ WDj ) − ∑ LBkip (Eq. L-3)
MWR ∗ SCR j =1 k =1
EP10AP09.052</MATH>
Where: SCP = Stoichiometric coefficient of the u = Number of by-products generated in
EPip = Total mass of each fluorinated GHG fluorinated GHG produced. production process i.
product emitted from production process CP = Concentration (mass fraction) of the
fluorinated GHG product in stream j of
(d) The total mass of the reactant that
i over the period p (metric tons). is consumed by production process i
destroyed wastes. If this concentration is
P = Total mass of the fluorinated GHG over the period p shall be estimated by
EP10AP09.051</MATH>
only a trace concentration, CP is equal to

produced by production process i over using Equation L–4 of this section:
zero.
the period p (metric tons). WDj = Mass of wastes removed from
R = Total mass of the reactant that is
consumed by production process i over
production process i in stream j and R = RF − RR (Eq. L-4)
destroyed over the period p (metric tons,
the period p (metric tons, defined in defined in Equation L–5 of this section). Where:
EP10AP09.050</MATH>
Equation L–4). LBkip = Yield loss related to by-product k for R = Total mass of the reactant that is
MWR = Molecular weight of the reactant. production process i over the period p consumed by production process i over
MWP = Molecular weight of the fluorinated (metric tons, defined in Equation L–6 of the period p (metric tons).
GHG produced. this section). RF = Total mass of the reactant that is fed into
SCR = Stoichiometric coefficient of the q = Number of waste streams destroyed in production process i over the period p
EP10AP09.049</MATH>
reactant. production process i. (metric tons).
RR = Total mass of the reactant that is WDj = WFj ∗ DE (Eq. L-5) into the destruction device over the
permanently removed from production period p (metric tons).
process i over the period p (metric tons). Where: DE = Destruction Efficiency of the
WDj = The mass of wastes removed from destruction device (fraction).
(e) The mass of wastes removed from production process i in stream j and
production process i in stream j and destroyed over the period p (metric (f) Yield loss related to by-product k
destroyed over the period p shall be tons). for production process i over period p
estimated using Equation L–5 of this WFj = The total mass of wastes removed from shall be estimated using Equation L–6 of
section: production process i in stream j and fed this section:
LBkip =
(B kip * MWP * MEBk )
(Eq. L-6)
( MW Bk * ME p )
Where: occurs in any process stream in more concentration is only a trace

LBkip = Yield loss related to by-product k for than trace concentrations, the mass of concentration, CBkj is equal to zero.
production process i over the period p by-product k generated by production Sj = Mass flow of process stream j of
(metric tons). process i over the period p shall be production process i over the period p.
Bkip = Mass of by-product k generated by q = Number of streams in production process
production process i over the period p estimated using Equation L–7 of this
section: i.
(metric tons, defined in Equation L–7 of
this section). (h) If by-product k is responsible for
MWP = Molecular weight of the fluorinated q
GHG produced.
MWBk = Molecular weight of by-product k.
Bkip = ∑ cBjk ∗ S j
j
(Eq. L-7) yield loss, is a fluorinated GHG, occurs
in any process stream in more than trace
MEBk = Moles of the element shared by the concentrations, and is not completely
Where:
reactant, product, and by-product k per recaptured or completely destroyed; the
mole of by-product k. Bkip = Mass of by-product k generated by total mass of by-product k emitted from
MEP = Moles of the element shared by the production process i over the period p production process i over the period p
reactant, product, and by-product k per (metric tons).
mole of the product. shall be estimated at least daily using
CBkj = Concentration (mass fraction) of the
Equation L–8 of this section:
(g) If by-product k is responsible for by-product k in stream j of production
yield loss in production process i and process i over the period p. If this
q v
EBkip = Bkip − ∑ cBkj ∗ WDj − ∑ cBkl ∗ S Rl (Eq. L-8)
j =l l =1
Where: § 98.124 Monitoring and QA/QC with an accuracy and precision of 5

EBkip = Mass of by-product k emitted from requirements. percent or better at the concentrations of
production process i over the period p (a) The total mass of fluorinated GHGs the process samples. This concentration
(metric tons). produced over the period p shall be (mass fraction) shall be multiplied by
Bkip = Mass of by-product k generated by estimated at least daily using the the mass measurement to obtain the
production process i over the period p methods and measurements set forth in mass of the reactant permanently
(metric tons). §§ 98.413(b) and 98.414. removed from the production process.
CBkj = Concentration (mass fraction) of the
by-product k in stream j of destroyed (b) The total mass of each reactant fed (d) If the waste permanently removed
wastes over the period p. If this into the production process shall be from the production process and fed
concentration is only a trace measured at least daily using into the destruction device contains
concentration, CBj is equal to zero. flowmeters, weigh scales, or a more than trace concentrations of the
WDj = The mass of wastes that are removed combination of volumetric and density
fluorinated GHG product, the mass of
from production process i in stream j and measurements with an accuracy and
waste fed into the destruction device EP10AP09.056</MATH>
that are destroyed over the period p precision of 0.2 percent of full scale or
shall be measured at least daily using
(metric tons, defined in Equation L–5 of better.
this section). flowmeters, weigh scales, or a
(c) The total mass of each reactant
CBkl = The concentration (mass fraction) of combination of volumetric and density
permanently removed from the
the by-product k in stream l of measurements with an accuracy and
production process shall be measured at
EP10AP09.055</MATH>
recaptured material over the period p. If least daily using flowmeters, weigh precision of 0.2 percent of full scale or
this concentration is only a trace
scales, or a combination of volumetric better. If the measured mass includes
concentration, CBkl is equal to zero. more than trace concentrations of
SRl = The mass of materials that are removed
and density measurements with an
accuracy and precision of 0.2 percent of materials other than the product, the
from production process i in stream l concentration of the product shall be
EP10AP09.054</MATH>
and that are recaptured over the period full scale or better. If the measured mass
includes more than trace concentrations measured at least daily using equipment
p.
q = Number of waste streams destroyed in of materials other than the reactant, the and methods (e.g., gas chromatography)
production process i. concentration of the reactant shall be with an accuracy and precision of 5
v = Number of streams recaptured in measured at least daily using equipment percent or better at the concentrations of
EP10AP09.053</MATH>
production process i. and methods (e.g., gas chromatography) the process samples.
(e) If a by-product is responsible for monthly through analysis of certified § 98.125 Procedures for estimating
yield loss and occurs in any process standards with known concentrations of missing data.
stream in more than trace the same chemicals in the same ranges (a) A complete record of all measured
concentrations, the mass flow of each (fractions by mass) as the process parameters used in the GHG emissions
process stream that contains more than samples. Calibration gases prepared calculations is required. Therefore,
trace concentrations of the by-product from a high-concentration certified whenever a quality-assured value of a
shall be measured at least daily using standard using a gas dilution system required parameter is unavailable (e.g.,
flowmeters, weigh scales, or a that meets the requirements specified in if a meter malfunctions during unit
combination of volumetric and density Test Method 205, 40 CFR Part 51, operation or if a required process
measurements with an accuracy and Appendix M may also be used. sample is not taken), a substitute data
precision of 0.2 percent of full scale or (i) For purposes of equation L–5, the value for the missing parameter shall be
better. If the measured mass includes destruction efficiency can initially be used in the calculations, according to
more than trace concentrations of equated to the destruction efficiency the following requirements:
materials other than the by-product, the determined during a previous
concentration of the by-product shall be (1) For each missing value of the mass
performance test of the destruction of fluorinated GHG produced, the mass
measured at least daily using equipment device or, if no performance test has
and methods (e.g., gas chromatography) of reactants fed into the production
been done, the destruction efficiency process, the mass of reactants
with an accuracy and precision of 5 provided by the manufacturer of the
percent or better at the concentrations of permanently removed from the
destruction device. Fluorinated GHG production process, the mass flow of
the process samples. production facilities that destroy
(f) If a by-product is a fluorinated process streams containing more than
fluorinated GHGs shall conduct annual trace concentrations of by-products that
GHG, occurs in more than trace
measurements of mass flow and lead to yield losses, or the mass of
concentrations in any process stream,
fluorinated GHG concentrations at the wastes fed into the destruction device;
occurs in more than trace
outlet of the thermal oxidizer in the substitute value of that parameter
concentrations in any stream that is
recaptured or is fed into a destruction accordance with EPA Method 18 at 40 shall be a secondary mass measurement
device, and is not completely CFR part 60, appendix A–6. Tests shall taken during the period the primary
recaptured or completely destroyed; the be conducted under conditions that are mass measurement was not available.
mass flow of each stream that contains typical for the production process and For example, if the mass produced is
more than trace concentrations of the destruction device at the facility. The usually measured with a flowmeter at
by-product and that is recaptured or is sensitivity of the emissions tests shall be the inlet to the day tank and that
fed into the destruction device or shall sufficient to detect emissions equal to flowmeter fails to meet an accuracy or
be measured at least daily using 0.01 percent of the mass of fluorinated precision test, malfunctions, or is
flowmeters, weigh scales, or a GHGs being fed into the destruction rendered inoperable; then the mass
combination of volumetric and density device. If the test indicates that the produced may be estimated by
measurements with an accuracy and actual DE of the destruction device is calculating the change in volume in the
precision of 0.2 percent of full scale or lower than the previously determined day tank and multiplying it by the
better. If the measured mass includes DE, facilities shall either: density of the product.
more than trace concentrations of (1) Substitute the DE implied by the (2) For each missing value of
materials other than the by-product, the most recent emissions test for the fluorinated GHG concentration, the
concentration of the by-product shall be previously determined DE in the substitute data value shall be the
measured at least daily using equipment calculations in § 98.123, or arithmetic average of the quality-assured
and methods (e.g., gas chromatography) (2) Perform more extensive values of that parameter immediately
with an accuracy and precision of 5 performance testing of the DE of the preceding and immediately following
percent or better at the concentrations of oxidizer and use the DE determined by the missing data incident. If no quality-
the process samples. the more extensive testing in the assured data are available prior to the
(g) All flowmeters, scales, load cells, calculations in § 98.123. missing data incident, the substitute
and volumetric and density measures data value shall be the first quality-
used to measure quantities that are to be (j) In their estimates of the mass of
fluorinated GHGs destroyed, fluorinated assured value obtained after the missing
reported under § 98.126 shall be
GHG production facilities that destroy data period.
calibrated using suitable NIST-traceable
standards and suitable methods fluorinated GHGs shall account for any (3) If the methods specified in
published by a consensus standards temporary reductions in the destruction paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section
organization (e.g., ASTM, ASME, efficiency that result from any startups, are likely to significantly under- or
ASHRAE, or others). Alternatively, shutdowns, or malfunctions of the overestimate the value of the parameter
calibration procedures specified by the destruction device, including departures during the period when data were
flowmeter, scale, or load cell from the operating conditions defined in missing, you shall develop a best
manufacturer may be used. Calibration state or local permitting requirements estimate of the parameter, documenting
shall be performed prior to the first and/or oxidizer manufacturer the methods used, the rationale behind
reporting year. After the initial specifications. them, and the reasons why the methods
calibration, recalibration shall be (k) Fluorinated GHG production specified in (a)(1) and (2) would lead to
performed at least annually or at the facilities shall account for fluorinated a significant under- or overestimate of
minimum frequency specified by the GHG emissions that occur as a result of the parameter.
manufacturer, whichever is more startups, shutdowns, and malfunctions,
§ 98.126 Data reporting requirements.
frequent. either recording fluorinated GHG
(h) All gas chromatographs used to emissions during these events, or (a) In addition to the information
determine the concentration of documenting that these events do not required by § 98.3(c), you shall report
fluorinated greenhouse gases in process result in significant fluorinated GHG the following information for each
streams shall be calibrated at least emissions. production process at the facility.
(1) The total mass of the fluorinated (5) Name of all applicable federal or calculation procedures, monitoring and
GHG produced in metric tons, by state regulations that may apply to the QA/QC methods, missing data
chemical. destruction process. procedures, reporting requirements, and
(2) The total mass of each reactant fed (6) If any process changes affect unit recordkeeping requirements of subpart
into the production process in metric destruction efficiency or the methods HH of this part.
tons, by chemical. used to record mass of fluorinated GHG (c) Emissions of CH4 from on-site
(3) The total mass of each reactant destroyed, then a revised report must be wastewater treatment. You must follow
permanently removed from the submitted to reflect the changes. The the requirements of subpart II of this
production process in metric tons, by revised report must be submitted to EPA part.
chemical. within 60 days of the change.
(4) The total mass of the fluorinated § 98.133 Definitions.
GHG product removed from the § 98.127 Records that must be retained. All terms used in this subpart have
production process and destroyed. (a) In addition to the data required by the same meaning given in the Clean Air
(5) The mass of each by-product §§ 98.123 and 98.126, you shall retain Act and subpart A of this part.
generated. the following records:
(6) The mass of each by-product (1) Dated records of the data used to Subpart N—Glass Production
destroyed at the facility. estimate the data reported under
(7) The mass of each by-product § 98.140 Definition of the source category.
§§ 98.123 and 98.126.
recaptured and sent off-site for (2) Dated records documenting the (a) A glass manufacturing facility
destruction. initial and periodic calibration of the manufactures flat glass, container glass,
(8) The mass of each by-product gas chromatographs, weigh scales, pressed and blown glass, or wool
recaptured for other purposes. flowmeters, and volumetric and density fiberglass by melting a mixture of raw
(9) The mass of each fluorinated GHG measures used to measure the quantities materials to produce molten glass and
emitted. reported under this subpart, including form the molten glass into sheets,
(b) Where missing data have been the industry standards or manufacturer containers, fibers, or other shapes. A
estimated pursuant to § 98.125, you directions used for calibration pursuant glass manufacturing facility uses one or
shall report the information specified in to § 98.124(g) and (h). more continuous glass melting furnaces
paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section. (b) In addition to the data required by to produce glass.
(1) The reason the data were missing, paragraph (a) of this section, the (b) A glass melting furnace that is an
the length of time the data were missing, designated representative of a experimental furnace or a research and
the method used to estimate the missing fluorinated GHG production facility that development process unit is not subject
data, and the estimates of those data. destroys fluorinated GHGs shall keep to this subpart.
(2) Where the missing data have been
records of test reports and other § 98.141 Reporting threshold.
estimated pursuant to § 98.125(a)(3),
information documenting the facility’s You must report GHG emissions
you shall also report the rationale for
one-time destruction efficiency report under this subpart if your facility
the methods used to estimate the
and annaul destruction device outlet contains a glass production process and
missing data and why the methods
reports in § 98.126(c) and (d). the facility meets the requirements of
specified in § 98.125 (a)(1) and (2)
would lead to a significant under- or § 98.128 Definitions. either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2).
overestimate of the parameter(s). All terms used in this subpart have § 98.142 GHGs to report.
(c) A fluorinated GHG production the same meaning given in the Clean Air
facility that destroys fluorinated GHGs (a) You must report CO2 process
Act and subpart A of this part. emissions from each continuous glass
shall report the results of the annual
fluorinated GHG concentration melting furnace at your glass
Subpart M—Food Processing
measurements at the outlet of the manufacturing facility as required by
destruction device, including: § 98.130 Definition of the source category. this subpart.
(1) Flow rate of fluorinated GHG being Food processing facilities prepare raw (b) You must report the CO2, N2O, and
fed into the destruction device in kg/hr. ingredients for consumption by animals CH4 emissions from fuel combustion at
(2) Concentration (mass fraction) of or humans. Food processing facilities each continuous glass melting furnace
fluorinated GHG at the outlet of the transform raw ingredients into food, and at any other on-site stationary fuel
destruction device. transform food into other forms for combustion unit. For each stationary
(3) Flow rate at the outlet of the consumption by humans or animals, or fuel combustion unit, you must follow
destruction device in kg/hr. transform food for further processing by the requirements of subpart C of this
(4) Emission rate calculated from the food processing industry. part.
paragraphs(c)(2) and (c)(3) of this
§ 98.131 Reporting threshold. § 98.143 Calculating GHG emissions.
section in kg/hr.
(d) A fluorinated GHG production You must report GHG emissions (a) If you operate and maintain a
facility that destroys fluorinated GHGs under this subpart if your facility continuous emission monitoring system
shall submit a one-time report contains a food processing operation (CEMS) that measures total CO2
containing the following information: and the facility meets the requirements emissions consistent with the
(1) Destruction efficiency (DE) of each of either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2). requirements in subpart C of this part,
destruction unit. you must estimate total CO2 emissions
(2) Test methods used to determine § 98.132 GHGs to report. according to the requirements in
the destruction efficiency. You must report: § 98.33.
(3) Methods used to record the mass (a) Emissions of CO2, N2O, and CH4 (b) If you do not operate and maintain
of fluorinated GHG destroyed. from on-site stationary combustion. You a CEMS that measures total CO2
(4) Chemical identity of the must follow the requirements of subpart emissions consistent with the
fluorinated GHG(s) used in the C of this part. requirements in subpart C of this part,
performance test conducted to (b) Emissions of CH4 from on-site you shall calculate process emissions of
determine DE. landfills. You must follow the CO2 from each glass melting furnace
according to paragraphs (b)(1) through from the supplier of the raw material the material charged to the furnace, as
(5) of this section, except as specified in carbonate-based mineral mass fraction. shown in Table N–1 to this subpart.
paragraph (c) of this section. (2) Determine the quantity of each (4) Use Equation N–1 of this subpart
carbonate-based raw material charged to
(1) For each carbonate-based raw to calculate process mass emissions of
the furnace.
material charged to the furnace, obtain (3) Apply the appropriate emission CO2 for each furnace:
factor for each carbonate-based raw
n
E CO 2 = ∑ MF • M
i =1
i i • EFi • Fi (Eq. N-1)
Where: MFi = Mass fraction of carbonate-based Fi = Fraction of calcination achieved for

ECO2 = Process mass emissions of CO2 (metric mineral i in carbonate-based raw carbonate-based raw material i, assumed
ton/yr) from the furnace. material i (dimensionless unit). to be equal to 1.0 (dimensionless unit).
Mi = Mass of carbonate-based raw material i
n = Number of carbonate-based raw materials (5) You must determine the total
charged to furnace (metric ton/yr).
charged to furnace. EFi = Emission factor for carbonate-based raw process CO2 emissions from continuous
material i (metric ton CO2/metric ton glass melting furnaces at the facility
carbonate-based raw material). using Equation N–2 of this section:
k
CO 2 = ∑E
i =1
CO2 i (Eq. N-2)
Where: Coke Ash by Atomic Absorption § 98.147 Records that must be retained.
CO2 = Total annual process CO2 emissions Method). In addition to the information
from glass manufacturing facility (metric required by § 98.3(g), you must retain
tons/year). § 98.145 Procedures for estimating
the records listed in paragraphs (a)
ECO2i = Annual CO2 emissions from glass missing data.
through (e) of this section.
melting furnace i (metric tons CO2/year). (a) Missing data on the monthly (a) Total number of continuous glass
k = Number of continuous glass melting
amounts of carbonate-based raw melting furnaces.
furnaces.
materials charged to any continuous (b) Monthly glass production rate for
(c) As an alternative to data provided glass melting furnace shall be replaced each continuous glass melting furnace.
by the raw material supplier, a value of by the average of the data from the (c) Monthly amount of each
1.0 can be used for the mass fraction previous month and the following carbonate-based raw material charged to
(MFi) of carbonate-based mineral i in month for each carbonate-based raw each continuous glass melting furnace.
Equation N–1 of this section. material charged. (d) If process CO2 emissions are
(b) Missing data on the mass fractions calculated using data provided by the
§ 98.144 Monitoring and QA/QC raw material supplier according to
requirements. of carbonate-based minerals in the
carbonate-based raw materials shall be § 98.143(b)(1), you must retain the
(a) You shall determine annual replaced using the assumption that the records in paragraphs (d)(1) and (2) of
amounts of carbonate-based raw mass fraction of each carbonate based this section.
materials charged to each continuous mineral is 1.0. (1) Data on carbonate-based mineral
glass melting furnace using calibrated mass fractions provided by the raw
scales or weigh hoppers. Total annual § 98.146 Data reporting requirements. material supplier.
mass charged to glass melting furnaces You shall report the information (2) Results of all tests used to verify
at the facility shall be compared to specified in paragraphs (a) through (d) the carbonate-based mineral mass
records of raw material purchases for of this section for each continuous glass fraction for each carbonate-based raw
the year. melting furnace. material charged to a continuous glass
(b) If raw material supplier data are melting furnace.
(a) Annual process emissions of CO2, (e) All other documentation used to
used to determine carbonate-based in metric tons/yr.
mineral mass fractions according to support the reported GHG emissions.
(b) Annual quantity of each carbonate-
§ 98.143(b)(1), measurements of the § 98.148 Definitions.
based raw material charged, in metric
mass fraction of each carbonate-based All terms used in this subpart have
tons/yr.
mineral in the carbonate-based raw the same meaning given in the Clean Air
materials shall be made at least annually (c) Annual quantity of glass produced,
in metric tons/yr. Act and subpart A of this part.
to verify the mass fraction data provided
by the supplier of the raw material; such (d) If process CO2 emissions are TABLE N–1 OF SUBPART N—CO2
measurements shall be based on calculated based on data provided by EMISSION FACTORS FOR CAR-
EP10AP09.058</MATH>
sampling and chemical analysis the raw material supplier according to

BONATE-BASED RAW MATERIALS
conducted by a certified laboratory § 98.143(a)(1), the carbonate-based
using a suitable method published by a mineral mass fraction (as percent) for Carbonate-based raw CO2 Emission
consensus standards organization (e.g., each carbonate-based raw material material—mineral factor a
ASTM Method D3682, Test Method for charged to a continuous glass melting
EP10AP09.057</MATH>
Major and Minor Elements in Coal and furnace. Limestone—CaCO3 .............. 0.440
TABLE N–1 OF SUBPART N—CO2 HFC–23 destruction process and the HFC–23 produced over the year. This
EMISSION FACTORS FOR CAR- facility meets the requirements of either calculation is summarized in Equation
BONATE-BASED RAW MATERIALS— § 98.2(a)(1) or (2). O–1 of this section:
Continued § 98.152 GHGs to report. n
(a) You must report the CO2, N2O, and G23 = ∑ c23 ∗ Fp ∗ 10−3 (Eq. O -1)
Carbonate-based raw CO2 Emission
material—mineral factor a CH4 emissions from each on-site p =1
stationary combustion unit. For these Where:
Dolomite—CaMg(CO3)2 ........ 0.477 stationary combustion units, you must G23 = Mass of HFC–23 generated annually
Sodium carbonate/soda follow the applicable calculation (metric tons).
ash—Na2CO3 .................... 0.415 procedures, monitoring and QA/QC c23 = Fraction HFC–23 by weight in HFC–23/
a Emission factors in units of metric tons of methods, missing data procedures, other product stream.
CO2 emitted per metric ton of carbonate- reporting requirements, and Fp = Mass flow of HFC–23/other product
based raw material charged to the furnace. recordkeeping requirements of subpart stream during the period p (kg).
C of this part. p = Period over which mass flows and
Subpart O—HCFC–22 Production and (b) You must report HFC–23 concentrations are measured.
HFC–23 Destruction n = Number of concentration and flow
emissions from HCFC–22 production measurement periods for the year.
§ 98.150 Definition of the source category.
processes and HFC–23 destruction 10¥3 = Conversion factor from kilograms to
processes. metric tons.
The HCFC–22 production and HFC–
23 destruction source category consists § 98.153 Calculating GHG emissions. (2) Where the mass of only a reaction
of HCFC–22 production processes and (a) The total mass of HFC–23 product other than HFC–23 (either
HFC–23 destruction processes. generated from each HCFC–22 HCFC–22 or HCl) is measured, multiply
(a) An HCFC–22 production process production process shall be estimated the ratio of the daily (or more frequent)
produces HCFC–22 by using one of two methods, as measurement of the HFC–23
(chlorodifluoromethane, or CHClF2) applicable: concentration and the daily (or more
from chloroform (CHCl3) and hydrogen (1) Where the mass flow of the frequent) measurement of the other
fluoride (HF). combined stream of HFC–23 and product concentration by the daily (or
(b) An HFC–23 destruction process is another reaction product (e.g., HCl) is more frequent) mass produced of the
any process in which HFC–23 measured, multiply the daily (or more other product. To estimate annual HFC–
undergoes destruction. An HFC–23 frequent) HFC–23 concentration 23 production, sum the daily (or more
destruction process may or may not be measurement (which may be the average frequent) estimates of the quantities of
co-located with an HCFC–22 production of more frequent concentration HFC–23 produced over the year. This
process at the same facility. measurements) by the daily (or more calculation is summarized in Equation
frequent) mass flow of the combined O–2 of this section, assuming that the
§ 98.151 Reporting threshold. stream of HFC–23 and the other other product is HCFC–22. If the other
You must report GHG emissions product. To estimate annual HFC–23 product is HCl, HCl may be substituted
under this subpart if your facility production, sum the daily (or more for HCFC–22 in Equations O–2 and O–
contains a HCFC–22 production or frequent) estimates of the quantities of 3 of this section.
n
⎛c ⎞
G23 = ∑ ⎜ 23 ⎟ ∗ P22 ∗ 10−3 (Eq. O - 2)
p =1 ⎝ c22 ⎠
Where: (b) The mass of HCFC–22 produced the output measurement over the period
G23 = Mass of HFC–23 generated annually over the period p shall be estimated by p (kg).
(metric tons). using Equation O–3 of this section: LF = Factor to account for the loss of HCFC–
c23 = Fraction HFC–23 by weight in HCFC– 22 upstream of the measurement. The
22/HFC–23 stream.
c22 = Fraction HCFC–22 by weight in HCFC– P22 = LF ∗ ( O22 − U 22 ) (Eq. O-3) value for LF shall be determined
pursuant to § 98.154(e).
22/HFC–23 stream. Where:
P22 = Mass of HCFC–22 produced over the (c) For HCFC–22 production facilities
P22 = Mass of HCFC–22 produced over the
EP10AP09.062</MATH>
period p (kg). that do not use a thermal oxidizer or
p = Period over which masses and period p (kg).
have a thermal oxidizer that is not
concentrations are measured. O22 = mass of HCFC–22 that is measured
coming out of the Production process directly connected to the HCFC–22
n = Number of concentration and mass
measurement periods for the year. over the period p (kg). production equipment, HFC–23
10¥3 = Conversion factor from kilograms to U22 = Mass of used HCFC–22 that is added emissions shall be estimated using
EP10AP09.061</MATH>
metric tons. to the production process upstream of Equation O–4 of this section:
E23 = G23 − ( S23 + OD23 + D23 ) (Eq. O- 4)

EP10AP09.060</MATH>
Where: G23 = Mass of HFC–23 generated annually OD23 = Mass of HFC–23 sent off-site for
E23 = Mass of HFC–23 emitted annually (metric tons). destruction (metric tons).
(metric tons). S23 = Mass of HFC–23 packaged for sale D23 = Mass of HFC–23 destroyed on-site
annually (metric tons). (metric tons).
EP10AP09.059</MATH>
(d) For HCFC–22 production facilities Where: ED = Mass of HFC–23 emitted annually from
that use a thermal oxidizer connected to E23 = Mass of HFC–23 emitted annually thermal oxidizer (metric tons), calculated
the HCFC–22 production equipment, (metric tons). using Equation O–9 of this section.
HFC–23 emissions shall be estimated EL = Mass of HFC–23 emitted annually from
equipment leaks, calculated using
(e) The mass of HFC–23 emitted
using Equation O–5 of this section: Equation O–6 (metric tons). annually from equipment leaks (for use
EPV = Mass of HFC–23 emitted annually from in Equation O–5 of this section) shall be
E23 = EL + EPV + ED (Eq. O-5) process vents, calculated using Equation estimated by using Equation O–6 of this
O–7 (metric tons). section:
n
EL = ∑ ∑ c23 ∗ ( FGt ∗ N Gt + FLt ∗ N Lt ) ∗ 10−3 (Eq. O-6)
p =1 t
Where: NGt = The number of sources of equipment less than 10,000 ppmv as determined
EL = Mass of HFC–23 emitted annually from type and service t with screening values according to § 98.154(i).
equipment leaks (metric tons). greater than or equal to 10,000 ppmv as p = One hour.
c23 = Fraction HFC–23 by weight in the determined according to § 98.154(h). n = Number of hours during the year during
stream(s) in the equipment. FLt = The applicable leak rate specified in which equipment contained HFC–23.
FGt = The applicable leak rate specified in table O–1 for each source of equipment t = Equipment type and service as specified
table O–1 for each source of equipment type and service t with a screening value
in Table O–1.
type and service t with a screening value of less than 10,000 ppmv (kg/hr/source).
greater than or equal to 10,000 ppmv (kg/ NLt = The number of sources of equipment 10¥3 = Factor converting kg to metric tons.
hr/source). type and service t with screening values
TABLE O–1 OF SUBPART O—EMISSION FACTORS FOR EQUIPMENT LEAKS

Emission factor (kg/hr/source)
Equipment type Service
≥10,000 ppmv <10,000 ppmv
Valves ................................................................................................ Gas .............................................. 0.0782 0.000131

Valves ................................................................................................ Light liquid ................................... 0.0892 0.000165
Pump seals ........................................................................................ Light liquid ................................... 0.243 0.00187
Compressor seals .............................................................................. Gas .............................................. 1.608 0.0894
Pressure relief valves ........................................................................ Gas .............................................. 1.691 0.0447
Connectors ......................................................................................... All ................................................ 0.113 0.0000810
Open-ended lines .............................................................................. All ................................................ 0.01195 0.00150
(f) The mass of HFC–23 emitted estimated by using Equation O–7 of this
annually from process vents (for use in section:
Equation O–5 of this section) shall be
n
⎛ PR p ⎞
EPV = ∑ ERT * ⎜ ⎟ * l p ∗ 10
−3
(Eq. O-7)
p=1 ⎝ PRT ⎠
EP10AP09.067</MATH>
Where: D = Mass of HFC–23 destroyed annually § 98.154 Monitoring and QA/QC
EPV = Mass of HFC–23 emitted annually from (metric tons). requirements.
process vents (metric tons). FD = Mass of HFC–23 fed into the destruction
These requirements apply to
ERT = The HFC–23 emission rate from the device annually (metric tons).
measurements that are reported under
process vents during the period of the DE = Destruction Efficiency of the
this subpart or that are used to estimate EP10AP09.066</MATH>
most recent test (kg/hr). destruction device (fraction).
PRp = The HCFC–22 production rate during reported quantities pursuant to § 98.153.
the period p (kg/hr). (h) The total mass of HFC–23 emitted (a) The concentrations (fractions by
PRT = The HCFC–22 production rate during from destruction devices shall be weight) of HFC–23 and HCFC–22 in the
the most recent test period (kg/hr). estimated by using Equation O–9 of this product stream shall be measured at
EP10AP09.065</MATH>
lp = The length of the period p (hours). section: least daily using equipment and
10¥3= Factor converting kg to metric tons.
n = The number of periods in a year.
methods (e.g., gas chromatography) with
ED = FD − D (Eq. O-9) an accuracy and precision of 5 percent
(g) For facilities that destroy HFC–23, or better at the concentrations of the
Where:
the total mass of HFC–23 destroyed process samples.
EP10AP09.064</MATH>
shall be estimated by using Equation O– ED = Mass of HFC–23 emitted annually from

the destruction device (metric tons). (b) The mass flow of the product
8 of this section: stream containing the HFC–23 shall be
FD = Mass of HFC–23 fed into the destruction
device annually (metric tons). measured continuously using a flow
D = FD * DE (Eq. O-8) D = Mass of HFC–23 destroyed annually meter with an accuracy and precision of
EP10AP09.063</MATH>
Where: (metric tons). 1.0 percent of full scale or better.
(c) The mass of HCFC–22 or HCl difference between the number of leak least daily using flowmeters, weigh
coming out of the production process sources of equipment type t that could scales, or a combination of volumetric
shall be measured at least daily using emit HFC–23 and the number of sources and density measurements with an
weigh scales, flowmeters, or a of equipment type t with screening accuracy and precision of 1.0 percent of
combination of volumetric and density values greater than or equal to 10,000 full scale or better. If the measured mass
measurements with an accuracy and ppmv as determined under paragraph includes more than trace concentrations
precision of 1.0 percent of full scale or (h) of this section. of materials other than HFC–23, the
better. (j) The mass of HFC–23 emitted from concentrations of the HFC–23 shall be
(d) The mass of any used HCFC–22 process vents shall be estimated at least measured at least daily using equipment
added back into the production process monthly by conducting emissions tests and methods (e.g., gas chromatography)
upstream of the output measurement in at process vents at least annually and by with an accuracy and precision of 5
paragraph (c) of this section shall be incorporating the results of the most percent or better at the concentrations of
measured at least daily (when being recent emissions test into Equation O– the process samples. This concentration
added) using flowmeters, weigh scales, 6 of this subpart. Emissions tests shall (mass fraction) shall be multiplied by
or a combination of volumetric and be conducted in accordance with EPA the mass measurement to obtain the
density measurements with an accuracy Method 18 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix mass of the HFC–23 destroyed.
and precision of 1.0 percent of full scale A–6, under conditions that are typical (n) In their estimates of the mass of
or better. for the production process at the HFC–23 destroyed, designated
(e) The loss factor LF in Equation O– facility. The sensitivity of the tests shall representatives of HFC–23 destruction
3 of this subpart for the mass of HCFC– be sufficient to detect an emission rate facilities shall account for any
22 produced shall have the value 1.015 that would result in annual emissions of temporary reductions in the destruction
or another value that can be 200 kg of HFC–23 if sustained over one efficiency that result from any startups,
demonstrated, to the satisfaction of the year. shutdowns, or malfunctions of the
Administrator, to account for losses of (k) For purposes of Equation O–8, the destruction device, including departures
HCFC–22 between the reactor and the destruction efficiency can initially be from the operating conditions defined in
point of measurement at the facility equated to the destruction efficiency state or local permitting requirements
where production is being estimated. determined during a previous and/or oxidizer manufacturer
(f) The mass of HFC–23 packaged for performance test of the destruction specifications.
sale shall be measured at least daily device or, if no performance test has (o) All flowmeters, scales, and load
(when being packaged) using been done, the destruction efficiency cells used to measure quantities that are
flowmeters, weigh scales, or a provided by the manufacturer of the to be reported under § 98.156 shall be
combination of volumetric and density destruction device. HFC–23 destruction calibrated using suitable NIST-traceable
measurements with an accuracy and facilities shall conduct annual standards and suitable methods
precision of 1.0 percent of full scale or measurements of mass flow and HFC–23 published by a consensus standards
better. concentrations at the outlet of the organization (e.g., ASTM, ASME,
(g) The mass of HFC–23 sent off-site thermal oxidizer in accordance with ASHRAE, or others). Alternatively,
for destruction shall be measured at EPA Method 18 at 40 CFR part 60, calibration procedures specified by the
least daily (when being packaged) using appendix A–6. Tests shall be conducted flowmeter, scale, or load cell
flowmeters, weigh scales, or a under conditions that are typical for the manufacturer may be used. Calibration
combination of volumetric and density production process and destruction shall be performed prior to the first
measurements with an accuracy and device at the facility. The sensitivity of reporting year. After the initial
precision of 1.0 percent of full scale or the emissions tests shall be sufficient to calibration, recalibration shall be
better. If the measured mass includes detect emissions equal to 0.01 percent of performed at least annually or at the
more than trace concentrations of the mass of HFC–23 being fed into the minimum frequency specified by the
materials other than HFC–23, the destruction device. If the test indicates manufacturer, whichever is more
concentration of the fluorinated GHG that the actual DE of the destruction frequent.
shall be measured at least daily using device is lower than the previously (p) All gas chromatographs used to
equipment and methods (e.g., gas determined DE, facilities shall either: determine the concentration of HFC–23
chromatography) with an accuracy and (1) Substitute the DE implied by the in process streams shall be calibrated at
precision of 5 percent or better at the most recent emissions test for the least monthly through analysis of
concentrations of the process samples. previously determined DE in the certified standards (or of calibration
This concentration (mass fraction) shall calculations in § 98.153. gases prepared from a high-
be multiplied by the mass measurement (2) Perform more extensive concentration certified standard using a
to obtain the mass of the HFC–23 sent performance testing of the DE of the gas dilution system that meets the
to another facility for destruction. oxidizer and use the DE determined by requirements specified in Test Method
(h) The number of sources of the more extensive testing in the 205, 40 CFR part 51, appendix M) with
equipment type t with screening values calculations in § 98.153. known HFC–23 concentrations that are
greater than or equal to 10,000 ppmv (l) Designated representatives of in the same range (fractions by mass) as
shall be determined using EPA Method HCFC–22 production facilities shall the process samples.
21 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A–7, and account for HFC–23 generation and
defining a leak as follows: emissions that occur as a result of § 98.155 Procedures for estimating
(1) A leak source that could emit startups, shutdowns, and malfunctions, missing data.
HFC–23, and either recording HFC–23 generation and (a) A complete record of all measured
(2) A leak source at whose surface a emissions during these events, or parameters used in the GHG emissions
concentration of fluorocarbons equal to documenting that these events do not calculations is required. Therefore,
or greater than 10,000 ppm is measured. result in significant HFC–23 generation whenever a quality-assured value of a
(i) The number of sources of and/or emissions. required parameter is unavailable (e.g.,
equipment type t with screening values (m) The mass of HFC–23 fed into the if a meter malfunctions during unit
less than 10,000 ppmv shall be the destruction device shall be measured at operation or if a required process
sample is not taken), a substitute data 23 generation/emissions during these (3) The methods used to record the
value for the missing parameter shall be events. mass of HFC–23 destroyed.
used in the calculations, according to (5) The names and addresses of (4) The name of other relevant federal
the following requirements: facilities to which any HFC–23 was sent or state regulations that may apply to
(1) For each missing value of the for destruction, and the quantities of the destruction process.
HFC–23 or HCFC–22 concentration, the HFC–23 (metric tons) sent to each. (5) If any changes are made that affect
substitute data value shall be the (6) The total mass of the HFC–23 HFC–23 destruction efficiency or the
arithmetic average of the quality-assured generated in metric tons. methods used to record volume
values of that parameter immediately (7) The mass of any HFC–23 packaged destroyed, then these changes must be
preceding and immediately following for sale in metric tons. reflected in a revision to this report. The
the missing data incident. If, for a (8) The mass of any HFC–23 sent off revised report must be submitted to EPA
particular parameter, no quality-assured site for destruction in metric tons. within 60 days of the change.
(9) The mass of HFC–23 emitted in
data are available prior to the missing
metric tons. § 98.157 Records that must be retained.
data incident, the substitute data value (10) The mass of HFC–23 emitted
shall be the first quality-assured value (a) In addition to the data required by
from equipment leaks in metric tons. § 98.3(g), the designated representative
obtained after the missing data period. (11) The mass of HFC–23 emitted
(2) For each missing value of the of an HCFC–22 production facility shall
from process vents in metric tons.
product stream mass flow or product retain the following records:
(b) Where missing data have been
mass, the substitute value of that estimated pursuant to § 98.155, the (1) The data used to estimate HFC–23
parameter shall be a secondary product designated representative of the HCFC– emissions.
measurement. If that measurement is 22 production facility or HCF–23 (2) Records documenting the initial
taken significantly downstream of the destruction facility shall report the and periodic calibration of the gas
usual mass flow or mass measurement reason the data were missing, the length chromatographs, weigh scales,
(e.g., at the shipping dock rather than of time the data were missing, the volumetric and density measurements,
near the reactor), the measurement shall method used to estimate the missing and flowmeters used to measure the
be multiplied by 1.015 to compensate data, and the estimates of those data. quantities reported under this rule,
for losses. (1) Where the missing data have been including the industry standards or
(3) Notwithstanding paragraphs (a)(1) estimated pursuant to § 98.155(a)(3), the manufacturer directions used for
and (2) of this section, if the owner or designated representative shall also calibration pursuant to § 98.154(o) and
operator has reason to believe that the report the rationale for the methods (p).
methods specified in paragraphs (a)(1) used to estimate the missing data and (b) In addition to the data required by
and (2) of this section are likely to why the methods specified in § 98.3(g), the designated representative
significantly under- or overestimate the § 98.155(a)(1) and (2) would probably of a HFC–23 destruction facility shall
value of the parameter during the period lead to a significant under- or retain the following records:
when data were missing (e.g., because overestimate of the parameter(s). (1) Records documenting their one-
the monitoring failure was linked to a (c) In addition to the information time and annual reports in § 98.156(c),
process disturbance that is likely to required by § 98.3(c), the designated (d), and (e).
have significantly increased the HFC–23 representative of a facility that destroys (2) Records documenting the initial
generation rate), the designated HFC–23 shall report the following for and periodic calibration of the gas
representative of the HCFC–22 each HFC–23 destruction process: chromatographs, weigh scales,
production facility shall develop his or (1) The mass of HFC–23 fed into the volumetric and density measurements,
her best estimate of the parameter, thermal oxidizer. and flowmeters used to measure the
documenting the methods used, the (2) The mass of HFC–23 destroyed. quantities reported under this subpart,
rationale behind them, and the reasons (3) The mass of HFC–23 emitted from including the industry standards or
why the methods specified in (a)(1) and the thermal oxidizer. manufacturer directions used for
(2) would probably lead to a significant (d) The designated representative of calibration pursuant to § 98.154(o) and
under- or overestimate of the parameter. each HFC–23 destruction facility shall (p).
report the results of the facility’s annual
§ 98.156 Data reporting requirements. HFC–23 concentration measurements at § 98.158 Definitions.
(a) In addition to the information the outlet of the destruction device, All terms used in this subpart have
required by § 98.3(c), the designated including: the same meaning given in the Clean Air
representative of an HCFC–22 (1) The flow rate of HFC–23 being fed Act and subpart A of this part.
production facility shall report the into the destruction device in kg/hr.
(2) The concentration (mass fraction) Subpart P—Hydrogen Production
following information at the facility
level: of HFC–23 at the outlet of the § 98.160 Definition of the source category.
destruction device.
(1) The mass of HCFC–22 produced in (a) A hydrogen production source
(3) The flow rate at the outlet of the
metric tons. category produces hydrogen gas that is
destruction device in kg/hr.
(2) The mass of reactants fed into the (4) The emission rate calculated from consumed at sites other than where it is
process in metric tons of reactant. paragraphs (c)(2) and (3) of this section produced.
(3) The mass (in metric tons) of in kg/hr. (b) This source category comprises
materials other than HCFC–22 and (e) The designated representative of process units that produce hydrogen by
HFC–23 (i.e., unreacted reactants, HCl an HFC–23 destruction facility shall oxidation, reaction, or other
and other by-products) that occur in submit a one-time report including the transformations of feedstocks.
more than trace concentrations and that following information: (c) This source category includes
are permanently removed from the (1) The destruction unit’s destruction hydrogen production facilities located
process. efficiency (DE). within a petroleum refinery and that are
(4) The method for tracking startups, (2) The methods used to determine not owned or under the direct control of
shutdowns, and malfunctions and HFC– the unit’s destruction efficiency. the refinery owner and operator.
§ 98.161 Reporting threshold. requirements, and recordkeeping § 98.33(b)(5)(iii)(A), (B), and (C), or
You must report GHG emissions requirements of subpart C of this part. § 98.33(b)(5)(ii)(A) through (F) shall
under this subpart if your facility (c) For CO2 collected and used on site calculate total CO2 emissions using a
contains a hydrogen production process or transferred off site, you must follow continuous emissions monitoring
and the facility meets the requirements the calculation procedures, monitoring system according to the Tier 4
of either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2). and QA/QC methods, missing data Calculation Methodology specified in
procedures, reporting requirements, and § 98.33(a)(4).
§ 98.162 GHGs to report. recordkeeping requirements of subpart (b) Feedstock material balance
You must report: PP of this part. approach. If you do not measure total
(a) CO2 process emissions for each emissions with a CEMS, you must
hydrogen production process unit. § 98.163 Calculating GHG emissions. calculate the annual CO2 process
(b) CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions from You must determine CO2 emissions in emissions from feedstock used for
the combustion of fuels in each accordance with the procedures hydrogen production.
hydrogen production unit and any other specified in either paragraph (a) or (b) (1) Gaseous feedstock. You must
stationary combustion units by of this section. calculate the total CO2 process
following the calculation procedures, (a) Continuous emission monitoring emissions from gaseous feedstock
monitoring and QA/QC methods, system. Any hydrogen process unit that according to Equation P–1 of this
missing data procedures, reporting meets the conditions specified in section:
⎛ k 44 MW ⎞
CO 2 = ⎜ ∑ ∗ ( Fdstk ) n ∗ (CC ) n ∗ ⎟ ∗ 0.001 (Eq. P-1)
⎝ n =1 12 MVC ⎠
Where: results for month n (kg C per kg of 0.001 = Conversion factor from kg to metric
CO2 = Annual CO2 process emissions arising feedstock). tons.
MW = Molecular weight of the gaseous
from feedstock consumption (metric
tons).
feedstock (kg/kg-mole). (2) Liquid feedstock. You must
MVC = Molar volume conversion factor calculate the total CO2 process
(Fdstk)n = Volume of the gaseous feedstock (849.5 scf per kg-mole at standard
used in month n (scf of feedstock). emissions from liquid feedstock
conditions).
(CC)n = Average carbon content of the k = Months per year. according to Equation P–2 of this
gaseous feedstock, from the analysis 44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to section:
carbon. and
⎛ k 44 ⎞
CO 2 = ⎜ ∑ ∗(Fdstk)n ∗(CC)n ⎟ ∗ 0.001 (Eq. P-2)
⎝ n=1 12 ⎠
Where: (CC)n = Average carbon content of the liquid (3) Solid feedstock. You must
CO2 = Annual CO2 emissions arising from feedstock, from the analysis results for calculate the total CO2 process
month n (kg C per gallon of feedstock).
feedstock consumption (metric tons). emissions from solid feedstock
k = Months per year.
(Fdstk)n = Volume of the liquid feedstock according to Equation P–3 of this
44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to
used in month n (gallons of feedstock). carbon. section:
0.001 = Conversion factor from kg to metric
tons.
⎛ k 44 ⎞
CO 2 = ⎜ ∑ ∗(Fdstk)n ∗(CC)n ⎟ ∗ 0.001 (Eq. P-3)
⎝ n=1 12 ⎠
Where: § 98.164 Monitoring and QA/QC appropriate test methods incorporated

CO2 = Annual CO2 emissions from feedstock requirements. by reference in § 98.7. The minimum
consumption in metric tons per month (a) Facilities that use CEMS must frequency of the fuel sampling and
(metric tons). comply with the monitoring and QA/QC analysis is monthly.
EP10AP09.070</MATH>
(Fdstk)n = Mass of solid feedstock used in procedures specified in § 98.34(e). (d) All fuel flow meters, gas
month n (kg of feedstock). (b) The quantity of gaseous or liquid composition monitors, and heating
(CC)n = Average carbon content of the solid feedstock consumed must be measured value monitors shall be calibrated prior
feedstock, from the analysis results for continuously using a flow meter. The to the first reporting year, using a
month n (kg C per kg of feedstock).
EP10AP09.069</MATH>
quantity of solid feedstock consumed suitable method published by a

k = Months per year. can be obtained from company records consensus standards organization (e.g.,
44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to and aggregated on a monthly basis. ASTM, ASME, API, AGA, or others).
carbon. (c) You must collect a sample of each Alternatively, calibration procedures
0.001 = Conversion factor from kg to metric feedstock and analyze the carbon specified by the flow meter
EP10AP09.068</MATH>
tons. content of each sample using manufacturer may be used. Fuel flow
meters, gas composition monitors, and § 98.167 Records that must be retained. product recovery coke oven battery
heating value monitors shall be In addition to the information combustion stacks, blast furnace stoves,
recalibrated either annually or at the required by § 98.3(g), you must retain boilers, process heaters, reheat furnaces,
minimum frequency specified by the the following records: annealing furnaces, flares, flame
manufacturer. (a) For all CEMS, you must comply suppression, ladle reheaters, and other
(e) You must document the with the CEMS recordkeeping miscellaneous combustion sources.
procedures used to ensure the accuracy requirements in § 98.37. (b) You must report process-related
of the estimates of feedstock (b) Monthly analyses of carbon CO2 emissions from each taconite
consumption. content for each feedstock used in indurating furnace; basic oxygen
hydrogen production. furnace; non-recovery coke oven battery
§ 98.165 Procedures for estimating combustion stack; sinter process; EAF;
missing data. § 98.168 Definitions.
argon-oxygen decarburization vessel;
A complete record of all measured All terms used in this subpart have and direct reduction furnace by
parameters used in the GHG emissions the same meaning given in the Clean Air following the procedures in this
calculations is required. Therefore, Act and subpart A of this part. subpart.
whenever a quality-assured value of a (c) You must report CO2 emissions
Subpart Q—Iron and Steel Production
required parameter is unavailable (e.g., from each coke pushing process by
if a meter malfunctions during unit § 98.170 Definition of the source category. following the procedures in this
operation), a substitute data value for The iron and steel production source subpart.
the missing parameter shall be used in category includes facilities with any of
the calculations, according to the § 98.173 Calculating GHG emissions.
the following processes: Taconite iron
following requirements: (a) For each taconite indurating
ore processing, integrated iron and steel
(a) For missing feedstock supply rates, furnace, basic oxygen furnace, non-
manufacturing, cokemaking not
use the lesser of the maximum supply recovery coke oven battery, sinter
colocated with an integrated iron and
rate that the unit is capable of process, EAF, argon-oxygen
steel manufacturing process, and
processing or the maximum supply rate decarburization vessel, and direct
electric arc furnace (EAF) steelmaking
that the meter can measure. reduction furnace, you must determine
not colocated with an integrated iron
CO2 emissions using the procedures in
(b) There are no missing data and steel manufacturing process.
paragraph (a)(1), (a)(2), or (3) of this
procedures for carbon content. A re-test Integrated iron and steel manufacturing
section as appropriate.
must be performed if the data from any means the production of steel from iron
(1) Continuous emissions monitoring
monthly measurements are determined ore or iron ore pellets. At a minimum,
system (CEMS). If you operate and
to be invalid. an integrated iron and steel
maintain a CEMS that measures CO2
(c) For missing CEMS data, you must manufacturing process has a basic
emissions consistent with the
use the missing data procedures in oxygen furnace for refining molten iron
requirements in subpart C, you must
§ 98.35. into steel. Each cokemaking process and
estimate total CO2 emissions according
EAF process located at a facility with an
§ 98.166 Data reporting requirements. to the requirements in § 98.33.
integrated iron and steel manufacturing
(2) Carbon mass balance method. For
In addition to the information process is part of the integrated iron and
the carbon balance method, calculate
required by § 98.3(c), each annual report steel manufacturing facility.
the mass emissions rate of CO2 in each
must contain the following information calendar month for each process as
for each process unit: specified in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through
(a) Facilities that use CEMS must (vii) of this section. The calculations are
comply with the procedures specified in based on the monthly mass of inputs
contains an iron and steel production
§ 98.36(a)(1)(iv). and outputs to each process and the
(b) Annual total consumption of requirements of either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2). respective weight fraction of carbon. If
feedstock for hydrogen production; you have a process input or output that
annual total of hydrogen produced; and § 98.172 GHGs to report. contains carbon that is not included in
annual total of ammonia produced, if (a) You must report combustion- the Equations, you must account for the
applicable. related CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions carbon and mass rate of that process
(c) Monthly analyses of carbon from each stationary combustion unit input or output in your calculations.
content for each feedstock used in and follow the requirements in subpart (i) For taconite indurating furnaces,
hydrogen production (kg carbon/kg of C of this part. Stationary combustion estimate CO2 emissions using Equation
feedstock). units include, but are not limited to, by- Q–1 of this section.
12
44 ⎡ ⎤
( Fs )n ( C sf ) + ( Fg ) ( C gf ) 0.001 + ( F1 )n ( C1f ) 0.001 + ( O )n ( Co ) − ( P )n ( C p ) ⎥
MW
CO 2 = ∑ (Eq. Q-1)
1 12 ⎢⎣ n n n MVC n n
⎦
Where: (Csf)n = Carbon content of the solid fuel, from results for month ‘‘n’’ (kg C per kg of
CO2 = Annual CO2 mass emissions from the the fuel analysis results for month ‘‘n’’ fuel).
indurating furnace (metric tons). (percent by weight, expressed as a MW = Molecular weight of the gaseous fuel
decimal fraction, e.g., 95% = 0.95). (kg/kg-mole).
44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to
(Fg)n = Volume of the gaseous fuel combusted MVC = Molar volume conversion factor
carbon. (849.5 scf per kg-mole at standard
(Fs)n = Mass of the solid fuel combusted in in month ‘‘n’’ (scf).
conditions).
month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons). (Cgf)n = Average carbon content of the 0.001 = Conversion factor from kg to metric
EP10AP09.071</MATH>
gaseous fuel, from the fuel analysis tons.
(Fl)n = Volume of the liquid fuel combusted (C0)n = Carbon content of the greenball (Cp)n = Carbon content of the fired pellets,
in month ‘‘n’’ (gallons). (taconite) pellets, from the carbon from the carbon analysis results for
(Clf)n = Carbon content of the liquid fuel, analysis results for month ‘‘n’’ (percent month ‘‘n’’ (percent by weight, expressed
from the fuel analysis results for month by weight, expressed as a decimal as a decimal fraction).
‘‘n’’ (kg C per gallon of fuel). fraction).
(O)n = Mass of greenball (taconite) pellets fed (ii) For basic oxygen process furnaces,
(P)n = Mass of fired pellets produced by the estimate CO2 emissions using Equation
to the furnace in month ‘‘n’’ (metric
tons). furnace in month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons). Q–2 of this section.
12
( Iron )n ( C Iron )n + ( Scrap )n ( CScrap ) + ( Flux )n ( CFlux )n
44 ⎡
CO 2 = ∑
1 12 ⎣ n
(Eq. Q- 2)
+ ( Carbon )n ( CCarbon )n − ( Steel )n ( CSteel )n − ( Slag )n ( CSlag ) ⎤
n⎦
Where: results for month ‘‘n’’ (percent by weight, (Steel)n = Mass of molten steel produced by
CO2 = Annual CO2 mass emissions from the expressed as a decimal fraction). the furnace in month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons).
(Flux)n = Mass of flux materials (e.g., (CSteel)n = Average carbon content of the steel,
basic oxygen furnace (metric tons).
limestone, dolomite) charged to the from the carbon analysis results for
44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to furnace in month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons).
carbon. month ‘‘n’’ (percent by weight, expressed
(CFlux)n = Average carbon content of the flux as a decimal fraction).
(Iron)n = Mass of molten iron charged to the materials, from the carbon analysis
furnace in month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons). (Slag)n = Mass of slag produced by the
results for month ‘‘n’’ (percent by weight,
expressed as a decimal fraction). furnace in month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons).
(CIron)n = Carbon content of the molten iron,
(Carbon)n = Mass of carbonaceous materials (CSlag)n = Average carbon content of the slag,
from the carbon analysis results for
(e.g., coal, coke) charged to the furnace from the carbon analysis results for
month ‘‘n’’ (percent by weight, expressed
in month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons). month ‘‘n’’ (percent by weight, expressed
as a decimal fraction).
(CCarbon)n = Average carbon content of the as a decimal fraction).
(Scrap)n = Mass of ferrous scrap charged to
carbonaceous materials, from the carbon
the furnace in month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons). (iii) For non-recovery coke oven
analysis results for month ‘‘n’’ (percent
(CScrap)n = Average carbon content of the by weight, expressed as a decimal batteries, estimate CO2 emissions using
ferrous scrap, from the carbon analysis fraction). Equation Q–3 of this section.
12
44
CO 2 = ∑ ⎡( Coal )n ( C Coal )n − ( Coke )n ( CCoke )n ⎤⎦ (Eq. Q-3
3)
1 12 ⎣
Where: (Coal)n = Mass of coal charged to the battery (CCoke)n = Carbon content of the coke, from
CO2 = Annual CO2 mass emissions from the in month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons). the carbon analysis results for month ‘‘n’’
non-recovery coke oven battery (metric (CCoal)n = Carbon content of the coal, from the (percent by weight, expressed as a
carbon analysis results for month ‘‘n’’ decimal fraction).
tons). (percent by weight, expressed as a
44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to decimal fraction). (iv) For sinter processes, estimate CO2
carbon. (Coke)n = Mass of coke produced by the emissions using Equation Q–4 of this
battery in month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons). section.
12
( Fg ) ( C gf )
44 ⎡ MW
CO 2 = ∑ 0.001 +
1 12 ⎣ n n MVC (Eq. Q-4)
( Feed )n ( CFeed ) − ( Sinter )n ( CSinter )n ⎤⎦
Where: MW = Molecular weight of the gaseous fuel for month ‘‘n’’ (percent by weight,
CO2 = Annual CO2 mass emissions from the (kg/kg-mole). expressed as a decimal fraction).
sinter process (metric tons). MVC = Molar volume conversion factor (Sinter)n = Mass of sinter produced in month
44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to (849.5 scf per kg-mole at standard ‘‘n’’ (metric tons).
carbon. conditions). (CSinter)n = Carbon content of the sinter
EP10AP09.074</MATH>
(Fg)n = Volume of the gaseous fuel combusted 0.001 = Conversion factor from kg to metric pellets, from the carbon analysis results
in month ‘‘n’’ (scf). tons. for month ‘‘n’’ (percent by weight,
(Cgf)n = Average carbon content of the (Feed)n = Mass of sinter feed material in expressed as a decimal fraction).
gaseous fuel, from the fuel analysis month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons).
results for month ‘‘n’’ (kg C per kg of (CFeed)n = Carbon content of the sinter feed (v) For EAFs, estimate CO2 emissions
fuel). material, from the carbon analysis results using Equation Q–5 of this section.
EP10AP09.073</MATH>
EP10AP09.072</MATH>
12
( Iron )n ( C Iron )n + ( Scrap )n ( CScrap ) + ( Flux )n
44 ⎡
CO 2 = ∑
1 12 ⎣ n
(C f ) + ( Electrode )n ( CElectrode )n + ( Carbon )n ( CC ) − ( Steel )n (Eq. Q-5)

n
( CSteel )n − ( Slag )n ( CSlag )

n
Where: (Flux)n = Mass of flux materials (e.g., analysis results for month ‘‘n’’ (percent
CO2 = Annual CO2 mass emissions from the limestone, dolomite) charged to the by weight, expressed as a decimal
EAF (metric tons). furnace in month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons). fraction).
44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to (CFlux)n = Average carbon content of the flux (Steel)n = Mass of molten steel produced by
materials, from the carbon analysis the furnace in month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons).
carbon.
results for month ‘‘n’’ (percent by weight, (CSteel)n = Average carbon content of the steel,
(Iron)n = Mass of direct reduced iron (if any)
expressed as a decimal fraction). from the carbon analysis results for
charged to the furnace in month ‘‘n’’
(Electrode)n= Mass of carbon electrode month ‘‘n’’ (percent by weight, expressed
(metric tons). consumed in month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons). as a decimal fraction).
(CIron)n = Carbon content of the molten iron, (CElectrode)n = Average carbon content of the (Slag)n = Mass of slag produced by the
from the carbon analysis results for carbon electrode, from the carbon furnace in month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons).
month ‘‘n’’ (percent by weight, expressed analysis results for month ‘‘n’’ (percent (CSlag)n = Average carbon content of the slag,
as a decimal fraction). by weight, expressed as a decimal from the carbon analysis results for
(Scrap)n = Mass of ferrous scrap charged to fraction). month ‘‘n’’ (percent by weight, expressed
the furnace in month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons). (Carbon)n = Mass of carbonaceous materials as a decimal fraction).
(CScrap)n = Average carbon content of the (e.g., coal, coke) charged to the furnace
ferrous scrap, from the carbon analysis in month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons). (vi) For argon-oxygen decarburization
results for month ‘‘n’’ (percent by weight, (CCarbon)n = Average carbon content of the vessels, estimate CO2 emissions using
expressed as a decimal fraction). carbonaceous materials, from the carbon Equation Q–6 of this section.
12
44
CO 2 = ∑ ( Steel )n [( C Steelin )n − ( CSteelout )n ] (Eq. Q-6)
1 12
Where: (Steel)n = Mass of molten steel charged to the (CSteelout)n = Average carbon content of the
CO2 = Annual CO2 mass emissions from the vessel in month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons). molten steel after decarburization, from
argon-oxygen decarburization vessel (CSteelin)n = Carbon content of the molten steel the carbon analysis results for month ‘‘n’’
before decarburization, from the carbon (percent by weight, expressed as a
(metric tons).
analysis results for month ‘‘n’’ (percent decimal fraction).
44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to by weight, expressed as a decimal
carbon. fraction).
12
44 ⎡
( Fg ) ( Cgf ) MW
CO 2 = ∑ 0.001 + ( Ore )n (Core ) (Eq. Q-7)
1 12 ⎢⎣ n n MVC
+ (Carbon) n ( CCarbon )n + (Other ) n ( COther )n
− ( Iron) n ( CIron )n − ( NM ) n ( CNM )n ⎤⎦
(vii) For direct reduction furnaces, MVC = Molar volume conversion factor by weight, expressed as a decimal
estimate CO2 emissions using Equation (849.5 scf per kg-mole at standard fraction).
Q–7 of this section. conditions). (Other)n = Mass of other materials charged to
0.001 = Conversion factor from kg to metric the furnace in month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons).
Where: tons. (COther)n = Average carbon content of the
CO2 = Annual CO2 mass emissions from the (Ore)n = Mass of iron ore or iron ore pellets other materials charged to the furnace,
direct reduction furnace (metric tons). fed to the furnace in month ‘‘n’’ (metric from the carbon analysis results for
EP10AP09.077</MATH>
44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to tons). month ‘‘n’’ (percent by weight, expressed
carbon. (COre)n = Carbon content of the iron ore, from as a decimal fraction).
(Fg)n = Volume of the gaseous fuel combusted the carbon analysis results for month ‘‘n’’ (Iron)n = Mass of iron produced in month ‘‘n’’
on day ‘‘n’’ or in month ‘‘n’’, as (percent by weight, expressed as a (metric tons).
applicable (scf). decimal fraction). (CIron)n = Carbon content of the iron, from the
EP10AP09.076</MATH>
(Cgf)n = Average carbon content of the (Carbon)n = Mass of carbonaceous materials carbon analysis results for month ‘‘n’’
gaseous fuel, from the fuel analysis (e.g., coal, coke) charged to the furnace (percent by weight, expressed as a
results for month ‘‘n’’ (kg C per kg of in month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons). decimal fraction).
fuel). (CCarbon)n = Average carbon content of the (NM)n = Mass of non-metallic materials
MW = Molecular weight of the gaseous fuel carbonaceous materials, from the carbon produced by the furnace in month ‘‘n’’
EP10AP09.075</MATH>
(kg/kg-mole). analysis results for month ‘‘n’’ (percent (metric tons).
(CNM)n = Average carbon content of the non- emissions from all exhaust stacks for the the test and calculate the average rate
metallic materials, from the carbon process and measure either the feed rate for the test period in metric tons per
analysis results for month ‘‘n’’ (percent of materials into the process or the hour.
by weight, expressed as a decimal production rate during the test as
fraction). (ii) You must calculate the hourly CO2
described in paragraphs (a)(3)(i) through
emission rate using Equation Q–8 and
(3) Site-specific emission factor (iv) of this section.
method. You must conduct a (i) You must measure the production determine the average hourly CO2
performance test and measure CO2 rate or feed rate, as applicable, during emission rate for the test.
⎛ 100 − % H 2 O ⎞
CO 2 = 5.18 x 10−7 CCO 2 Q ⎜ ⎟ (Eq. Q-8)
⎝ 100 ⎠
Where: (3) For each process input and output (2) For the furnace exhaust from basic
CO2 = CO2 mass emission rate (metric tons/ other than fuels, the carbon content oxygen furnaces, EAFs, argon-oxygen
hr). must be analyzed by an independent decarburization vessels, and direct
5.18 × 10 7 = Conversion factor (tons/scf- certified laboratory using test method reduction furnaces, sample the furnace
% CO2). ASTM C25–06 (‘‘Standard Test Methods exhaust for at least nine complete
CCO2 = Hourly CO2 concentration (% CO2). for Chemical Analysis of Limestone, production cycles that start when the
Q = Hourly stack gas volumetric flow rate
(scfh).
Quicklime, and Hydrated Lime’’). furnace is being charged and end after
%H2O = Hourly moisture percentage in the (3) For each process input and output steel or iron and slag have been tapped.
stack gas. other than fuels, the carbon content For EAFs that produce both carbon steel
must be analyzed by an independent and stainless or specialty (low carbon)
(iii) You must calculate a site-specific certified laboratory using the test steel, develop an emission factor for the
emission factor for the process in metric methods specified in this paragraph. production of both types of steel.
tons of CO2 per metric ton of feed or
(A) Use ASTM C25–06 (‘‘Standard (3) For taconite indurating furnaces,
production, as applicable, by dividing
Test Methods for Chemical Analysis of non-recovery coke batteries, and sinter
the average hourly CO2 emission rate
Limestone, Quicklime, and Hydrated processes, sample for at least 9 hours.
during the test by the average hourly
Lime’’) for: (4) Conduct the stack test using EPA
feed or production rate during the test.
(iv) You must calculate CO2 emissions (i) Limestone, dolomite, and slag; Method 3A in 40 CFR part 60, Appendix
for the process by multiplying the ASTM D5373–08 (‘‘Standard Test A–2 to measure the CO2 concentration,
emission factor by the total amount of Methods for Instrumental Determination Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, or 2F in appendix
feed or production, as applicable, for the of Carbon, Hydrogen, and Nitrogen in A–1 or Method 26, appendix A–2 of 40
reporting period. Laboratory Samples of Coal and Coke’’) CFR part 60 to determine the stack gas
for coal, coke, and other carbonaceous volumetric flow rate, and Method 4 in
(b) You must determine emissions of
materials; ASTM E1915–07a (‘‘Standard appendix A–3 of 40 CFR part 60 to
CO2 from the coke pushing process in
Test Methods for Analysis of Metal determine the moisture content of the
mtCO2e by multiplying the metric tons
Bearing Ores and Related Materials by stack gas.
of coal charged to the coke ovens during
Combustion Infrared-Absorption
the reporting period by 0.008. (5) Conduct a new performance test
Spectrometry’’) for iron ore, taconite
and calculate a new site-specific
§ 98.174 Monitoring and QA/QC pellets, and other iron-bearing materials.
requirements.
emission factor if your fuel type or fuel/
(ii) ASTM E1019–03 (‘‘Standard Test
feedstock mix changes, the process
(a) If you operate and maintain a Methods for Determination of Carbon,
changes in a manner that affects energy
CEMS that measures total CO2 Sulfur, Nitrogen, and Oxygen in Steel
efficiency by more than 10 percent, or
emissions consistent with subpart C of and in Iron, Nickel, and Cobalt Alloys’’)
the process feed materials change in a
this part, you must meet the monitoring for iron and ferrous scrap.
manner that changes the carbon content
and QA/QC requirements of § 98.34(e). (iii) ASTM E1019–03 (‘‘Standard Test of the fuel or feed by more than 10
(b) If you determine CO2 emissions Methods for Determination of Carbon, percent.
using the carbon balance procedure in Sulfur, Nitrogen, and Oxygen in Steel
§ 98.173(a)(2), you must: and in Iron, Nickel, and Cobalt Alloys’’), (6) The results of a performance test
ASTM CS–104 (‘‘Carbon Steel of must include the analysis of samples,
(1) For each process input and output
Medium Carbon Content’’), ISO/TR determination of emissions, and raw
other than fuels, determine the mass
15349–1:1998 (‘‘Unalloyed steel— data. The performance test report must
rate of each process input and output
Determination of low carbon content. contain all information and data used to
and record the totals for each process
Part 1’’), or ISO/TR 15349–3: 1998 derive the emission factor.
input and output for each calendar
month. Determine the mass rate of fuels (‘‘Unalloyed steel—Determination of (d) For CH4, and N2O emissions, you
using the procedures for combustion low carbon content. Part 3’’) as must meet the monitoring and QA/QC
units in § 98.34. applicable for steel. requirements of § 98.34.
(2) For each process input and output (c) If you determine CO2 emissions (e) For a coke pushing process,
other than fuels, sample each process using the site-specific emission factor determine the metric tons of coal
input and output weekly and prepare a procedure in § 98.173(a)(3), you must: charged to the coke ovens and record
monthly composite sample for carbon (1) Conduct an annual performance the totals for each pushing process for
analysis. For each process input that is test under normal process operating each calendar month. Coal charged to
a fuel, determine the carbon content conditions and at a production rate no coke ovens can be measured using
using the procedures for combustion less than 90 percent of the process rated weigh belts or a combination of
EP10AP09.078</MATH>
units in § 98.34. capacity. measuring volume and bulk density.
§ 98.175 Procedures for estimating (b) Monthly total for all process (including but not limited to, lead-acid
missing data. inputs and outputs for each calendar batteries) are recycled by smelting into
There are no allowances for missing quarter when the carbon balance is used elemental lead or lead alloys.
data for facilities that estimate for specific processes.
emissions using the carbon balance (c) Monthly analyses of carbon § 98.181 Reporting threshold.
procedure in § 98.173(a)(2) or the site- content for each calendar quarter when You must report GHG emissions
emission factor procedure in the carbon balance is used for specific under this subpart if your facility
§ 98.133(a)(3); 100 percent data processes. contains a lead production process and
availability is required. (d) Site-specific emission factor for all the facility meets the requirements of
process units for which the site-specific either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2).
§ 98.176 Data reporting requirements. emission factor approach is used.
In addition to the information (e) Annual production quantity for § 98.182 GHGs to report.
required by § 98.3(c), each annual report taconite pellets, coke, sinter, iron, and (a) You must report the CO2 process
must contain the information required raw steel with records for each calendar emissions from each smelting furnace
in paragraphs (a) through (g) of this quarter. used for lead production as required by
section for coke pushing and for each (f) Facilities must keep records that
this subpart.
taconite indurating furnace; basic include a detailed explanation of how
oxygen furnace; non-recovery coke oven company records or measurements are (b) You must report the CO2, CH4, and
battery; sinter process; EAF; argon- used to determine all sources of carbon N2O emissions from each stationary
oxygen decarburization vessel; and input and output and the metric tons of combustion unit following the
direct reduction furnace, as applicable: coal charged to the coke ovens (e.g., requirements specified in subpart C of
(a) Annual CO2 emissions by calendar weigh belts, a combination of measuring this part.
quarters. volume and bulk density). The owner or § 98.183 Calculating GHG emissions.
(b) Annual total for all process inputs operator also must document the
and outputs when the carbon balance is procedures used to ensure the accuracy (a) If you operate and maintain a
used for specific processes by calendar of the measurements of fuel usage CEMS that measures total CO2
quarters (short tons). including, but not limited to, calibration emissions consistent with the
(c) Annual production quantity (in of weighing equipment, fuel flow requirements in subpart C of this part,
metric tons) for taconite pellets, coke, meters, coal usage including, but not you must estimate total CO2 emissions
sinter, iron, and raw steel by calendar limited to, calibration of weighing according to the requirements in
quarters. equipment and other measurement § 98.33.
(d) Production capacity (in tons per devices. The estimated accuracy of (b) If you do not operate and maintain
year) for the production of taconite measurements made with these devices a CEMS that measures total CO2
pellets, coke, sinter, iron, and raw steel. must also be recorded, and the technical emissions consistent with the
(e) Annual operating hours for basis for these estimates must be requirements in subpart C of this part,
taconite furnaces, coke oven batteries, provided. you must determine using the procedure
sinter production, blast furnaces, direct specified in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of
reduced iron furnaces, and electric arc § 98.178 Definitions. this section the total CO2 emissions
furnaces. All terms used in this subpart have from the smelting furnaces at your
(f) Site-specific emission factor for all the same meaning given in the Clean Air facility used for lead production.
process units for which the site-specific Act and subpart A of this part.
emission factor approach is used. (1) For each smelting furnace at your
(g) Facilities that use CEMS must also Subpart R—Lead Production facility used for lead production, you
comply with the data reporting must determine the mass of carbon in
§ 98.180 Definition of the source category. each carbon-containing material, other
requirements specified in § 98.36(d)(iv).
The lead production source category than fuel, that is fed, charged, or
§ 98.177 Records that must be retained. consists of primary lead smelters and otherwise introduced into the smelting
In addition to the records required by secondary lead smelters. A primary lead furnaces used at your facility for lead
§ 98.3(g), you must retain the records smelter is a facility engaged in the production for each calendar month and
specified in paragraphs (a) through (f) of production of lead metal from lead estimate total CO2 process emissions
this section, as applicable. sulfide ore concentrates through the use from the affected units at your facility
(a) Annual CO2 emissions as of pyrometallurgical techniques. A using Equation R–1 of this section.
measured or determined for each secondary lead smelter is a facility at Carbon containing input materials
calendar quarter. which lead-bearing scrap materials include carbonaceous reducing agents.
12
( Lead )n ( CLead )n + ( Scrap )n ( CScrap ) + ( Flux )n ( CFlux )n + ( Carbon )n ( CCarbon )n + ( Other )n ( COther )n ⎤
44 ⎡
E CO2 = ∑ (Eq.. R-1)
n =1 12 ⎣ n ⎦
Where: (CLead)n = Carbon content of the lead ore, from (Flux)n = Mass of flux materials (e.g.,
CO2 = Total annual CO2 process emissions the carbon analysis results for month ‘‘n’’ limestone, dolomite) charged to the
from the individual smelting furnace (percent by weight, expressed as a furnace in month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons).
decimal fraction). (CFlux)n = Average carbon content of the flux
(metric tons).
(Scrap)n = Mass of lead scrap charged to the materials, from the carbon analysis
44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to furnace in month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons). results for month ‘‘n’’ (percent by weight,
carbon. (CScrap)n = Average carbon content of the lead expressed as a decimal fraction).
(Lead)n = Mass of lead ore charged to the scrap, from the carbon analysis results (Carbon)n = Mass of carbonaceous materials
smelting furnace in month ‘‘n’’ (metric for month ‘‘n’’ (percent by weight, (e.g., coal, coke) charged to the furnace
EP10AP09.079</MATH>
tons). expressed as a decimal fraction). in month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons).
(CCarbon)n = Average carbon content of the ASTM C25–06 (‘‘Standard Test Methods § 98.187 Records that must be retained.
carbonaceous materials, from the carbon for Chemical Analysis of Limestone, In addition to the records required by
analysis results for month ‘‘n’’ (percent Quicklime, and Hydrated Lime’’) for § 98.3(g), you must retain the records
by weight, expressed as a decimal analysis of flux materials such as
fraction). specified in paragraphs (a) through (d)
(Other)n = Mass of any other materials
limestone or dolomite. of this section.
charged to the furnace in month ‘‘n’’ (a) Monthly facility production
(metric tons). missing data. quantity for each lead product (in metric
(COther)n = Average carbon content of any tons).
other materials from the carbon analysis For the carbon input procedure in
(b) Number of facility operating hours
results for month ‘‘n’’ (percent by weight, § 98.183(b), a complete record of all
each month.
expressed as a decimal fraction). measured parameters used in the GHG
(c) If you use the carbon input
emissions calculations is required (e.g.,
(2) You must determine the total CO2 procedure, record for each carbon-
raw materials carbon content values,
emissions from the smelting furnaces containing input material consumed or
etc.). Therefore, whenever a quality-
using Equation R–2 of this section. used (other than fuel), the information
assured value of a required parameter is
specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of
k unavailable, a substitute data value for
this section.
CO 2 = ∑ E CO2k (Eq. R-2) the missing parameter shall be used in
(1) Monthly material quantity (in
1 the calculations.
metric tons).
Where: (a) For each missing value of the
(2) Monthly average carbon content
carbon content the substitute data value
CO2 = Total annual CO2 emissions, metric determined for material and records of
tons/year. shall be the arithmetic average of the
the supplier provided information or
ECO2k = Annual CO2 emissions from smelting quality-assured values of that parameter
analyses used for the determination.
furnace k calculated using Equation R– immediately preceding and immediately
(d) You must keep records that
1 of this subpart, metric tons/year. following the missing data incident. If,
include a detailed explanation of how
k = Total number of smelting furnaces at for a particular parameter, no quality-
facility used for the lead production. company records of measurements are
assured data are available prior to the
used to estimate the carbon input to
missing data incident, the substitute
§ 98.184 Monitoring and QA/QC each smelting furnace. You also must
requirements. data value shall be the first quality-
document the procedures used to ensure
assured value obtained after the missing
If you determine CO2 emissions using the accuracy of the measurements of
data period.
the carbon input procedure in (b) For missing records of the mass of materials fed, charged, or placed in an
§ 98.183(b), you must meet the carbon-containing input material affected unit including, but not limited
requirements specified in paragraphs (a) consumption, the substitute data value to, calibration of weighing equipment
through (c) of this section. shall be the best available estimate of and other measurement devices. The
(a) Determine the mass of each solid the mass of the input material. The estimated accuracy of measurements
carbon-containing input material by owner or operator shall document and made with these devices must also be
direct measurement of the quantity of keep records of the procedures used for recorded, and the technical basis for
the material placed in the unit or by all such estimates. these estimates must be provided.
calculations using process operating
§ 98.188 Definitions.
information, and record the total mass § 98.186 Data Reporting Procedures.
for the material for each calendar In addition to the information All terms used in this subpart have
month. required by § 98.3(c) of this part, each the same meaning given in the Clean Air
(b) For each input material identified annual report must contain the Act and subpart A of this part.
in paragraph (a) of this section, you information specified in paragraphs (a)
must determine the average carbon Subpart S—Lime Manufacturing
through (e) of this section.
content of the material for each calendar (a) Total annual CO2 emissions from § 98.190 Definition of the source category.
month using information provided by each smelting furnace operated at your Lime manufacturing processes use a
your material supplier or by collecting facility for lead production (metric tons rotary lime kiln to produce a lime
and analyzing a representative sample and the method used to estimate product (e.g., calcium oxide, high-
of the material. emissions). calcium quicklime, calcium hydroxide,
(c) For each input material identified (b) Facility lead product production hydrated lime, dolomitic quicklime,
in paragraph (a) of this section for capacity (metric tons). dolomitic hydrate, or other products)
which the carbon content is not (c) Annual facility production from limestone or dolomite by means of
provided by your material supplier, the quantity (metric tons). calcination. The lime manufacturing
carbon content of the material must be (d) Number of facility operating hours source category consists of marketed
analyzed by an independent certified in calendar year. lime manufacturing facilities and non-
laboratory each calendar month using (e) If you use the carbon input marketed lime manufacturing facilities.
the test methods and their QA/QC procedure, report for each carbon-
procedures in § 98.7. Use ASTM E1941– containing input material consumed or § 98.191 Reporting threshold.
04 (‘‘Standard Test Method for used (other than fuel), the following You must report GHG emissions
Determination of Carbon in Refractory information: under this subpart if your facility
and Reactive Metals and Their Alloys’’) (1) Annual material quantity (in contains a lime manufacturing process
for analysis of lead bearing ore, lead metric tons). and the facility meets the requirements
scrap, and lead ingot; ASTM D5373–02 (2) Annual weighted average carbon of either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2).
(‘‘Standard Test Methods for content determined for material and the
Instrumental Determination of Carbon, method used for the determination (e.g., § 98.192 GHGs to report.
Hydrogen, and Nitrogen in Laboratory supplier provided information, analyses (a) You must report CO2 process
Samples of Coal and Coke’’) for analysis of representative samples you emissions from each lime kiln as
EP10AP09.080</MATH>
of carbonaceous reducing agents, and collected). specified in this subpart.
(b) You must report CO2, N2O, and you must estimate total CO2 emissions products/wastes produced at each kiln
CH4 emissions from fuel combustion at according to the requirements in according to the procedures in
each lime kiln and any other stationary § 98.33. paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this
combustion unit. You must follow the (b) If you do not operate and maintain section.
requirements of subpart C of this part.
a CEMS that measures total CO2 (1) You must calculate a monthly
§ 98.193 Calculating GHG emissions. emissions consistent with the emission factor for each kiln for each
(a) If you operate and maintain a requirements in subpart C of this part, type of lime produced using Equation
CEMS that measures total CO2 you shall calculate CO2 process S–1 of this section. Calcium oxide and
emissions consistent with the emissions based on the production of magnesium oxide content must be
requirements in subpart C of this part, each type of lime and calcined by- analyzed monthly for each kiln:
EFk,i = (SR CaO , i × CaOi ) + ( SR MgO,i × MgOi ) (Eq. S-1)
Where: SRMgO= Stoichiometric ratio of CO2 and MgO § 98.194(b), metric tons MgO/ metric ton
EFk = Emission factor for kiln k for lime type for lime type i (See Table S–1 of this lime.
subpart), metric tons CO2/ metric tons
i, metric tons CO2/metric ton lime.
SRCaO = Stoichiometric ratio of CO2 and CaO
MgO. (2) You must calculate the correction
CaOi= Calcium oxide content for lime type i factor for by-product/waste products at
for lime type i (see Table S–1 of this determined according to § 98.194(b),
subpart), metric tons CO2/ metric tons the kiln (monthly) using Equation S–2
metric tons CaO/ton lime.
CaO. MgOi = Magnesium oxide content for lime of this section:
type i determined according to
CFlkd , k = 1 + (M d ,i / M lime,i ) × Cd,i × Fd,i (Eq. S-2)
Where: Md,i = Weight of by-product/waste product Fd,i = Fraction of calcination of the original.
CFlkd,k = Correction factor for by-products/ not recycled to the kiln from lime type carbonate in the LKD of lime type i,
waste products (such as lime kiln dust, i, (tons of lime). assumed to be 1.00 (fraction).
Mlime,i= Weight of lime produced at the kiln
LKD) at kiln k. (3) You must calculate annual CO2
from lime type i, (tons of lime).
Cd,i = Fraction of original carbonate in the process emissions for each kiln using
LKD for lime type i, (fraction). Equation S–3 of this section:
ϕ 12
E k ∑ = ∑ ( EK k , n M k,n CFlkd,k,n ) 0.97 )
2000
(Eq. S-3)
ι =1 n 2205
Where: z instruments used for accounting

Ek = Annual CO2 process emissions from CO 2 = ∑ E k (Eq. S-4) purposes, such as weigh hoppers or belt
lime production at kiln k (metric tons/ k =1 weigh feeders.
year). Where: (b) You must determine the chemical
EFk,n = Emission factor for lime in calendar CO2 = Annual CO2 process emissions from composition (percent total CaO and
month n(tons CO2/tons carbonate) from lime production (metric tons/year). percent total MgO) of each type of lime
Equation S–1. Ek = Annual CO2 emissions from lime
production at kiln k (metric tons/year).
and each type of calcined by-product/
Mk,n = Weight or mass of lime produced in
z = Number of kilns for lime production. waste produced from each lime type by
calendar month n (tons/calendar month)
an off-site laboratory analysis on a
from Equation S–3.
§ 98.194 Monitoring and QA/QC monthly basis. This determination must
EP10AP09.084</MATH>
CFlkd,k,n = Correction factor for LKD for lime
requirements. be performed according to the
in calendar month n from Equation S–2.
(a) Determine the quantity of each requirements of ASTM C25–06,
0.97 = Default correction factor for the
type of lime produced at each kiln and ‘‘Standard Test Methods for Chemical
proportion of hydrated lime (Assuming
90 percent of hydrated lime produced is the quantity of each type of calcined by- Analysis of Limestone, Quicklime, and
product/waste produced for each lime Hydrated Lime’’ (incorporated by
EP10AP09.083</MATH>
high-calcium lime with a water content

of 28 percent). type, such as LKD, at the kiln on a reference—see § 98.7) and the
2000/2205 monthly basis. The quantity of each procedures in ‘‘CO2 Emissions
= Conversion factor for tons to metric tons. type of calcined by-product/waste Calculation Protocol for the Lime
= Number of lime types produced at kiln produced at the kiln must include Industry English Units Version’’,
February 5, 2008 Revision (incorporated
EP10AP09.082</MATH>
k. material that is sold or used in a

product, inventoried, or disposed of. by reference—see § 98.7).
(4) You must determine the total CO2 The quantity of lime types and LKD (c) You must use the most recent
process emissions for the facility using produced monthly by each kiln must be analysis of calcium oxide and
Equation S–4 of this section: determined by direct weight magnesium oxide content of each lime
EP10AP09.081</MATH>
measurement using the same plant product in monthly calculations.
(d) You must follow the quality (3) Annual lime production capacity (a) Any site where magnesium metal
assurance/quality control procedures (in metric tons) per facility; is produced through smelting (including
(including documentation) in the (4) All monthly emission factors, and; electrolytic smelting), refining, or
National Lime Association’s ‘‘CO2 (5) Number of operating hours in remelting operations.
Emissions Calculation Protocol for the calendar year.
(b) Facilities that use CEMS must also (b) Any site where molten magnesium
Lime Industry-English Units Version’’,
comply with the data reporting is used in alloying, casting, drawing,
February 5, 2008 Revision (incorporated
requirements specified in § 98.36. extruding, forming, or rolling
by reference—see § 98.7).
operations.
§ 98.195 Procedures for estimating § 98.197 Records that must be retained.
missing data. (a) In addition to the records required § 98.201 Reporting threshold.
For the procedure in § 98.193(b), a by § 98.3(g), you must retain the You must report GHG emissions
complete record of all measured following records specified in under this subpart if your facility
parameters used in the GHG emissions paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this contains a magnesium production
calculations is required (e.g., raw section for each lime kiln: process and the facility meets the
materials carbon content values, etc.). (1) Annual calcined by-products/ requirements of either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2).
Therefore, whenever a quality-assured waste products (by lime type summed
value of a required parameter is from monthly data. § 98.202 GHGs to report.
unavailable, a substitute data value for (2) Lime production (by lime type) per
the missing parameter shall be used in month (metric tons). (a) You must report emissions of the
the calculations. (3) Calculation of emission factors. following gases in kilograms and metric
(a) For each missing value of quantity (4) Results of chemical composition tons CO2e per year resulting from their
of lime types, CaO and MgO content, analysis (by lime product) per month. use as cover gases or carrier gases in
and quantity of LKD the substitute data (5) Monthly correction factors for by- magnesium production or processing:
value shall be the arithmetic average of products/waste products for each kiln. (1) Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6).
the quality-assured values of that (b) Facilities that use CEMS must also
comply with the recordkeeping (2) HFC–134a.
parameter immediately preceding and
immediately following the missing data requirements specified in § 98.37. (3) The fluorinated ketone, FK 5–1–
incident. If, for a particular parameter, 12.
no quality-assured data are available (4) Any other fluorinated GHGs.
prior to the missing data incident, the All terms used in this subpart have
the same meaning given in the Clean Air (5) Carbon dioxide (CO2).
substitute data value shall be the first
quality-assured value obtained after the Act and subpart A of this part. (b) You must report CO2, N2O, and
missing data period. CH4 emissions from each combustion
(b) For missing records of mass of raw TABLE S–1 OF SUBPART S—BASIC unit on site by following the calculation
material consumption, the substitute PARAMETERS FOR THE CALCULATION procedures, monitoring and QA/QC
data value shall be the best available OF EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIME methods, missing data procedures,
estimate of the mass of inputs. The PRODUCTION reporting requirements, and
owner or operator shall document and recordkeeping requirements of subpart
keep records of the procedures used for Variable Stoichiometric C of this part.
all such estimates. ratio
§ 98.203 Calculating GHG emissions.
§ 98.196 Data reporting requirements. SRCaO ................................ 0.7848
(a) In addition to the information SRMgO ............................... 1.0918 (a) Calculate CO2e GHG emissions
required by § 98.3(c), each annual report from magnesium production or
must contain the information specified Subpart T—Magnesium Production processing using Equation T–1 of this
in paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of this section. For Equation T–1 of this
section for each lime kiln: § 98.200 Definition of source category. section, use the procedures of either
(1) Annual CO2 process emissions; The magnesium production and paragraph (b) or (c) of this section to
(2) Annual lime production (in metric processing source category consists of estimate consumption of cover gas or
tons); the following facilities: carrier gas.
E GHG = ESF6 + E134 a + E FK + E CO 2 + E OG (Eq. T-1)
ESF6 = CSF6 × 23.9
E134 a = C134 a × 1.3
E FK = CFK × 0.001
E CO2 = CCO 2 × 0.001
E OG = COG × GWPOG /1000
Where: ESF6 = SF6 emissions from magnesium E134a = HFC–134a emissions from magnesium
EGHG = GHG emissions from magnesium production and processing (mtCO2e). production and processing (mtCO2e).
EP10AP09.186</MATH>
production and processing (mtCO2e).
EFK = FK 5–1–12 emissions from magnesium Qp = M B − M E (Eq. T-4) gas supplier); however, you remain
production and processing (mtCO2e). responsible for the accuracy of these
ECO2 = CO2 emissions from magnesium Where: masses or weights under this subpart.
production and processing (mtCO2e). Qp = The mass of the cover gas used over the (e) All flowmeters, scales, and load
EOG = Emissions of other fluorinated GHGs period (kg). cells used to measure quantities that are
from magnesium production and MB = The mass of the contents of the cylinder
processing (mtCO2e).
to be reported under this subpart shall
at the beginning of period p.
CSF6 = Consumption of SF6 (kg). ME = The mass of the contents of the cylinder
be calibrated using suitable NIST-
C134a = Consumption of HFC–134a (kg). at the end of period p. traceable standards and suitable
CFK = Consumption of FK 5–1–12 (kg). methods published by a consensus
CCO2 = Consumption of CO2 (kg). § 98.204 Monitoring and QA/QC standards organization (e.g., ASTM,
COG = Consumption of other fluorinated requirements. ASME, ASHRAE, or others).
GHGs (kg). (a) Consumption of cover gases and Alternatively, calibration procedures
GWPOG = The Global Warming Potential of carrier gases may be estimated by specified by the flowmeter, scale, or
the other fluorinated GHG provided in monitoring the changes in container load cell manufacturer may be used.
Table A–1 in subpart A of this part. weights and inventories using Equation Calibration shall be performed prior to
(b) To estimate consumption of cover T–2 of this subpart, by monitoring the the first reporting year. After the initial
gases or carrier gases by monitoring changes in individual container weights calibration, recalibration shall be
changes in container masses and as the contents of each container are performed at least annually or at the
inventories, consumption of each cover used using Equations T–3 and T–4 of minimum frequency specified by the
gas or carrier gas shall be estimated this subpart, or by monitoring the mass manufacturer, whichever is more
using Equation T–2 of this section: flow of the pure cover gas or carrier gas frequent.
into the cover gas distribution system.
C = IB − IE + A − D (Eq. T-2) Consumption must be estimated at least
missing data.
annually.
Where: (a) A complete record of all measured
(b) When estimating consumption by
C = Consumption of any cover gas or carrier monitoring the mass flow of the pure parameters used in the GHG emission
gas in kg over the period (e.g., 1 year). cover gas or carrier gas into the cover calculations is required. Therefore,
IB = Inventory of any cover gas or carrier gas whenever a quality-assured value of a
stored in cylinders or other containers at
gas distribution system, you must use
gas flow meters with an accuracy of one required parameter is unavailable, a
the beginning of the period (e.g., 1 year),
percent of full scale or better. substitute data value for the missing
including heels, in kg.
IE = Inventory of any cover gas or carrier gas (c) When estimating consumption parameter will be used in the
stored in cylinders or other containers at using Equation T–2 of this subpart, you calculations as specified in paragraph
the end of the period (e.g., 1 year), must ensure that all the quantities (b) of this section.
including heels, in kg. required by Equation T–2 of this subpart (b) Replace missing data on the
A = Acquisitions of any cover gas or carrier have been measured using scales or load consumption of cover gases by
gas during the period (e.g., 1 year) cells with an accuracy of one percent of multiplying magnesium production
through purchases or other transactions, during the missing data period by the
full scale or better, accounting for the
including heels in cylinders or other average cover gas usage rate from the
containers returned to the magnesium tare weights of the containers. You may
accept gas masses or weights provided most recent period when operating
production or processing facility, in kg.
by the gas supplier (e.g., for the contents conditions were similar to those for the
D = Disbursements of cover gas or carrier gas
to sources and locations outside the of containers containing new gas or for period for which the data are missing.
facility through sales or other the heels remaining in containers Calculate the usage rate for each cover
transactions during the period, including returned to the gas supplier); however, gas using Equation T–5 of this section:
heels in cylinders or other containers you remain responsible for the accuracy
returned by the magnesium production of these masses and weights under this R GHG = CGHG / Mg (Eq. T-5)
or processing facility to the gas
subpart. Where:
distributor, in kg.
(d) When estimating consumption RGHG = The usage rate for a particular cover
(c) To estimate consumption of cover using Equations T–3 and T–4 of this gas over the period.
gases or carrier gases by monitoring subpart, you must monitor and record CGHG = The consumption of that cover gas
changes in the masses of individual container identities and masses as over the period (kg).
containers as their contents are used, follows: Mg = The magnesium produced or fed into
consumption of each cover gas or carrier (1) Track the identities and masses of the casting process over the period
gas shall be estimated using Equation T– containers leaving and entering storage (metric tons).
3 of this section: with check-out and check-in sheets and § 98.206 Data reporting requirements. EP10AP09.088</MATH>
procedures. The masses of cylinders In addition to the information
n
returning to storage shall be measured
CGHG = ∑ Q p (Eq. T-3) immediately before the cylinders are put
required by § 98.3(c), each annual report
p =1
must include the following information
back into storage. for the magnesium production and
(2) Ensure that all the quantities
EP10AP09.087</MATH>
Where:
processing facility:
CGHG = The consumption of the cover gas required by Equations T–3 and T–4 of (a) Total GHG emissions for your
over the period (kg). this subpart have been measured using facility by gas in metric tons and CO2e.
Qp = The mass of the cover gas used over the scales or load cells with an accuracy of (b) Type of production process (e.g.
period (kg). one percent of full scale or better,
n = The number of periods in the year.
primary, secondary, die casting).
EP10AP09.086</MATH>
accounting for the tare weights of the (c) Magnesium production amount in
(d) For purposes of Equation T–3 of containers. You may accept gas masses metric tons for each process type.
this section, the mass of the cover gas or weights provided by the gas supplier (d) Cover gas flow rate and
used over the period p shall be (e.g., for the contents of cylinders composition.
estimated by using Equation T–4 of this containing new gas or for the heels (e) Amount of CO2 used as a carrier
EP10AP09.085</MATH>
section: remaining in cylinders returned to the gas during the reporting period.
(f) For any missing data, you must (a) Check-out and weigh-in sheets and other carbonate in a manufacturing
report the length of time the data were procedures for cylinders. process.
missing, the method used to estimate (b) Accuracy certifications and (b) This source category does not
emissions in their absence, and the calibration records for scales. include carbonates consumed for
quantity of emissions thereby estimated. (c) Residual gas amounts in cylinders producing cement, glass, ferroalloys,
(g) The facility’s cover gas usage rate. iron and steel, lead, lime, pulp and
(h) If applicable, an explanation of sent back to suppliers.
(d) Invoices for gas purchases and paper, or zinc.
any change greater than 30 percent in
the facility’s cover gas usage rate (e.g., sales. § 98.211 Reporting threshold.
installation of new melt protection § 98.208 Definitions. You must report GHG emissions from
technology or leak discovered in the
All terms used in this subpart have miscellaneous uses of carbonate if your
cover gas delivery system that resulted
the same meaning given in the Clean Air facility meets the requirements of either
in increased consumption).
(i) A description of any new melt Act and subpart A of this part. § 98.2(a)(1) or (2).
protection technologies adopted to § 98.212 GHGs to report.
account for reduced GHG emissions in Subpart U—Miscellaneous Uses of
any given year. Carbonate You must report CO2 emissions
aggregated for all miscellaneous
§ 98.207 Records that must be retained. § 98.210 Definition of the source category. carbonate use at the facility.
In addition to the records specified in (a) This source category consists of
§ 98.3(g), you must retain the following any equipment that uses limestone,
information for the magnesium dolomite, ankerite, magnesite, silerite, Calculate process emissions of CO2
production or processing facility: rhodochrosite, sodium carbonate, or any using Equation U–1 of this section.
i
2000
E CO2 = ∑ M i EFi Fi (Eq. U-1)
1 2205
Where: § 98.215 Procedures for estimating carbonate-based raw material by

ECO2 = Annual CO2 mass emissions from missing data. carbonate type.
consumption of carbonates (metric tons). There are no missing data procedures (c) Records of all carbonate purchases
Mi = Annual Mass of carbonate type i for miscellaneous uses of carbonates. A and deliveries.
consumed (tons). complete record of all measured
EFi = Emission factor for the carbonate type § 98.218 Definitions.
parameters used in the GHG emissions
i, as specified in Table U–1 to this calculations is required. A re-test must All terms used in this subpart have
subpart, metric tons CO2/metric ton be performed if the data from any the same meaning given in the Clean Air
carbonate consumed. measurements are determined to be Act and subpart A of this part.
Fi = Fraction calcination achieved for each invalid.
particular carbonate type i. TABLE U–1 OF SUBPART U—CO2
i = number of the carbonate types. § 98.216 Data reporting requirements. EMISSION FACTORS FOR COMMON
2000/2205 = Conversion factor to convert In addition to the information CARBONATES
tons to metric tons. required by § 98.3(c), each annual report
must contain the information specified CO2 emission
As an alternative to measuring the in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this factor
Mineral name—carbonate
calcination fraction (Fi), a value of 1.0 section at the facility level. (tons CO2/ton
can be used in Equation U–1 of this carbonate)
(a) Annual CO2 emissions from
section. miscellaneous carbonate use (in metric Limestone—CaCO3 .......... 0.43971
§ 98.214 Monitoring and QA/QC tons). Magnesite—MgCO3 .......... 0.52197
(b) Annual carbonate consumption Dolomite—CaMg(CO3)2 .... 0.47732
requirements.
(by carbonate type in tons). Siderite—FeCO3 ............... 0.37987
(a) The total mass of carbonate Ankerite—Ca(Fe,Mg,Mn)
(c) Annual fraction calcinations. (CO3)2 ............................ 0.44197
consumed can be determined by direct
(d) Average annual mass fraction of Rhodochrosite—MnCO3 ... 0.38286
weight measurement using the same carbonate-based mineral in carbonate- Sodium Carbonate/Soda
plant instruments used for accounting based raw material by carbonate type. Ash—Na2CO3 ................ 0.41492
purposes, such as weigh hoppers or belt
weigh feeders, or purchase records. § 98.217 Records that must be retained.
Subpart V—Nitric Acid Production
(b) Determine on an annual basis the In addition to the records required by
calcination fraction for each carbonate § 98.3(g), you must retain the records § 98.220 Definition of source category.
consumed based on sampling and specified in paragraphs (a) through (c) of A nitric acid production facility uses
chemical analysis conducted by a this section. oxidation, condensation, and absorption
certified laboratory using a suitable (a) Records of monthly carbonate to produce a weak nitric acid (30 to 70
method such as using an x-ray consumption (by carbonate type). You percent in strength).
fluorescence test or other enhanced must also document the procedures
used to ensure the accuracy of monthly § 98.221 Reporting threshold.
testing method published by a
consensus standards organization (e.g., carbonate consumption. You must report GHG emissions
ASTM, ASME, API, etc.). (b) Annual chemical analysis of mass under this subpart if your facility
EP10AP09.089</MATH>
fraction of carbonate-based mineral in contains a nitric acid production
process and the facility meets the § 98.223 Calculating GHG emissions. 40 CFR part 63, appendix A or ASTM
requirements of either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2). You must determine annual N2O D6348–03 incorporated by reference in
process emissions from each nitric acid § 98.7 to measure the N2O concentration
§ 98.222 GHGs to report. production line using a site-specific in conjunction with the applicable EPA
(a) You must report N2O process emission factor according to paragraphs Methods in 40 CFR part 60, Appendices
emissions from each nitric acid (a) through (e) of this section. A–1 through A–4. Conduct three
production line as required by this (a) You must conduct an annual emissions test runs of 1 hour each.
subpart. performance test to measure N2O (c) You must measure the production
emissions from the absorber tail gas vent rate during the test(s) and calculate the
(b) You must report CO2, CH4, and for each nitric acid production line. You production rate for the test period in
N2O emissions from each stationary must conduct the performance test(s) tons (100 percent acid basis) per hour.
combustion unit. You must follow the under normal process operating (d) You must calculate a site-specific
requirements of subpart C of this part. conditions. emission factor for each nitric acid
(b) You must conduct the emissions production line according to Equation
test(s) using either EPA Method 320 in V–1 of this section:
n CN2O = ∗1.14 × 10−7 ∗ Q

∑ P
EFN2O = 1
(Eq. V-1)
n
Where: 1.14×10¥7 = Conversion factor (lb/dscf-ppm (e) You must calculate N2O emissions
EFN2O = Site-specific N2O emissions factor (lb N2O). for each nitric acid production line by
Q = Volumetric flow rate of effluent gas
N2O/ton nitric acid produced, 100 multiplying the emissions factor by the
(dscf/hr).
percent acid basis). P = Production rate during performance test total annual production from that
CN2O = N2O concentration during (tons nitric acid produced per hour (100 production line, according to Equation
performance test (ppm N2O). percent acid basis)). V–2 of this section:
n = Number of test runs.
EFN 2 O ∗ Pa ∗ (1 − DFN ) ∗ AFN

EN2O = (Eq. V-2)
2205
Where: process modifications have occurred or emissions from nitric acid production
EN2O = N2O mass emissions per year (metric operating conditions have changed. lines. A complete record of all measured
tons of N2O). Only the data consistent with the period parameters used in the GHG emissions
EFN2O = Site-specific N2O emission factor for after the changes were implemented calculations is required.
the production line (lb N2O/ton acid shall be used.
produced, 100 percent acid basis). (b) Each facility must conduct the § 98.226 Data reporting requirements.
Pa = Total production for the year from the In addition to the information
performance test(s) according to a test
production line (ton acid produced, 100 required by § 98.3(c), each annual report
percent acid basis). plan and EPA Method 320 in 40 CFR
DFN = Destruction factor of N2O abatement part 63, Appendix A or ASTM D6348– must contain the information specified
technology, ’as specified by the 03 (incorporated by reference—see in paragraphs (a) through (h) of this
abatement device manufacturer (percent § 98.7). All QA/QC procedures specified section for each nitric acid production
of N2O removed from air stream). in the reference test methods and any line:
AFN = Abatement factor of N2O abatement associated performance specifications (a) Annual nitric acid production
technology (percent of year that apply. The report must include the capacity (metric tons).
abatement technology was used). items in paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of (b) Annual nitric acid production
2205 = Conversion factor (lb/metric ton). (metric tons).
this section.
§ 98.224 Monitoring and QA/QC (1) Analysis of samples, (c) Number of operating hours in the
requirements. determination of emissions, and raw calendar year (hours).
data. (d) Emission factor(s) used (lb N2O/
(a) You must conduct a new (2) All information and data used to ton of nitric acid produced).
performance test and calculate a new derive the emissions factor(s). (e) Type of nitric acid process used.
site-specific emissions factor at least (3) The production rate during each (f) Abatement technology used (if
annually. You must also conduct a new test and how it was determined. The applicable).
performance test whenever the production rate can be determined (g) Abatement utilization factor
production rate of a production line is through sales records or by direct (percent of time that abatement system
changed by more than 10 percent from measurement using flow meters or is operating).
EP10AP09.091</MATH>
the production rate measured during the weigh scales. (h) Abatement technology efficiency.
most recent performance test. The new
emissions factor may be calculated § 98.225 Procedures for estimating § 98.227 Records that must be retained.
using all available performance test data missing data. In addition to the information
(i.e., averaged with the data from Procedures for estimating missing required by § 98.3(g), you must retain
EP10AP09.090</MATH>
previous years), except in cases where data are not provided for N2O process the records specified in paragraphs (a)
through (c) of this section for each nitric (13) Natural gas driven pneumatic using the appropriate method from
acid production line: valve bleed devices. paragraphs (d)(1) through (9) of this
(a) Records of significant changes to (14) Non-pneumatic pumps. section:
process. (15) Offshore platform pipeline (1) Acid gas removal vent stack.
(b) Annual test reports of N2O fugitive emissions. Calculate acid gas removal vent stack
emissions. (16) Open-ended lines (oels). fugitive emissions using simulation
(c) Calculations of the site-specific (17) Pump seals. software packages, such as ASPENTM or
emissions factor(s). (18) Platform fugitive emissions. AMINECalcTM. Any standard simulation
(19) Processing facility fugitive software may be used provided it
§ 98.228 Definitions. emissions. accounts for the following parameters:
All terms used in this subpart have (20) Reciprocating compressor rod (i) Natural gas feed temperature,
the same meaning given in the Clean Air packing. pressure, and flow rate.
Act and subpart A of this part. (21) Storage station fugitive (ii) Acid gas content of feed natural
emissions. gas.
Subpart W—Oil and Natural Gas (22) Storage tanks.
Systems (iii) Acid gas content of outlet natural
(23) Storage wellhead fugitive
gas.
§ 98.230 Definition of the source category. emissions.
(24) Transmission station fugitive (iv) Unit operating hours, excluding
This source category consists of the downtime for maintenance or standby.
emissions.
following facilities: (v) Exit temperature of natural gas.
(b) You must report the CO2, CH4, and
(a) Offshore petroleum and natural gas (vi) Solvent pressure, temperature,
N2O emissions for stationary
production facilities. circulation rate and weight.
combustion sources, by following the
(b) Onshore natural gas processing (vii) If the acid gas removal unit is
calculation procedures, monitoring and
facilities. capturing CO2 and transferring it off
QA/QC methods, missing data
(c) Onshore natural gas transmission site, then refer to subpart OO of this part
procedures, reporting requirements, and
compression facilities. for calculating transferred CO2.
(d) Underground natural gas storage recordkeeping requirements of subpart
C of this part. (2) Natural gas driven pneumatic
facilities. pump. Calculate fugitive emissions from
(e) Liquefied natural gas storage § 98.233 Calculating GHG emissions. a natural gas driven pneumatic pump as
facilities. (a) Estimate emissions using either an follows:
(f) Liquefied natural gas import and annual direct measurement, as specified (i) Calculate fugitive emissions using
export facilities. in § 98.234, or an engineering estimation manufacturer data.
§ 98.231 Reporting threshold. method specified in this section. You (A) Obtain from the manufacturer
You must report GHG emissions from may use the engineering estimation specific pump model natural gas
oil and natural gas systems if your method only for sources for which a emission per unit volume of liquid
facility meets the requirements of either method is specified in this section. pumped at operating pressures.
§ 98.2(a)(1) or (2). (b) You may use engineering (B) Maintain a log of the amount of
estimation methods described in this liquid pumped annually from
§ 98.232 GHGs to report. section to calculate emissions from the individual pumps.
(a) You must report CO2 and CH4 following fugitive emissions sources: (C) Calculate the natural gas fugitive
emissions in metric tons per year from (1) Acid gas removal vent stacks. emissions for each pump using Equation
sources specified in § 98.232(a)(1) (2) Natural gas driven pneumatic W–1 of this section.
through (23) at offshore petroleum and pumps.
natural gas production facilities, (3) Natural gas driven pneumatic Es,n = Fs ∗ V (Eq. W-1)
onshore natural gas processing facilities, manual valve actuator devices.
onshore natural gas transmission (4) Natural gas driven pneumatic Where:
compression facilities, underground valve bleed devices. Es,n = Natural gas fugitive emissions at
natural gas storage facilities, liquefied (5) Blowdown vent stacks. standard conditions.
(6) Dehydrator vent stacks. Fs = Natural gas driven pneumatic pump gas
natural gas storage facilities and emission in ‘‘emission per volume of
liquefied natural gas import and export (c) A combination of engineering
estimation described in this section and liquid pumped at discharge pressure’’
facilities. units at standard conditions, as provided
(1) Acid gas removal (AGR) vent direct measurement described in by the manufacturer.
stacks. § 98.234 shall be used to calculate V = Volume of liquid pumped annually.
(2) Blowdown vent stacks. emissions from the following fugitive
(3) Centrifugal compressor dry seals. emissions sources: (D) Both CH4 and CO2 volumetric and
(4) Centrifugal compressor wet seals. (1) Flare stacks. mass fugitive emissions shall be
(5) Compressor fugitive emissions. (2) Storage tanks. calculated from volumetric natural gas
(6) Compressor wet seal degassing (3) Compressor wet seal degassing fugitive emissions using calculations in
vents. vents. paragraphs (f) and (g) of this section.
(7) Dehydrator vent stacks. (d) You must use the methods (ii) If manufacturer data for Fs are not
(8) Flare stacks. described in § 98.234 (d) or (e) to available, follow the method in § 98.234
(9) Liquefied natural gas import and conduct annual leak detection of (i)(1).
export facilities fugitive emissions. fugitive emissions from all sources (3) Natural gas driven pneumatic
(10) Liquefied natural gas storage listed in § 98.232(a). If fugitive manual valve actuator devices.
facilities fugitive emissions. emissions are detected, engineering Calculate fugitive emissions from a
(11) Natural gas driven pneumatic estimation methods may be used for natural gas driven pneumatic manual
pumps. sources listed in paragraphs (b) and (c) valve actuator device as follows:
(12) Natural gas driven pneumatic of this section. If engineering estimation (i) Calculate fugitive emissions using
EP10AP09.092</MATH>
manual valve actuator devices. is used, emissions must be calculated manufacturer data.
(A) Obtain from the manufacturer Es,n = Bs ∗ T (Eq. W-3) from volumetric natural gas fugitive
specific pneumatic device model emissions using calculations in
natural gas emission per actuation. Where: paragraphs (f) and (g) of this section.
(B) Maintain a log of the number of Es,n = Natural gas fugitive emissions at
(6) Dehydrator vent stacks. Calculate
times the pneumatic device was standard conditions.
fugitive emissions from a dehydrator
actuated throughout the reporting Bs = Natural gas driven pneumatic device
vent stack using a simulation software
period. bleed rate in ‘‘emission per unit time’’
units at standard conditions, as provided packages, such as GLYCalcTM. Any
(C) Calculate the natural gas fugitive standard simulation software may be
emissions for each manual valve by the manufacturer.
T = Amount of time the pneumatic device used provided it accounts for the
actuator using Equation W–2 of this following parameters:
section. has been operational through the
reporting period. (i) Feed natural gas flow rate.
Es,n = As ∗ N (Eq. W-2) (C) Calculate both CH4 and CO2 volumetric (ii) Feed natural gas water content.
and mass fugitive emissions from volumetric (iii) Outlet natural gas water content.
Where: natural gas fugitive emissions using
Es,n = Natural gas fugitive emissions at calculations in paragraphs (f) and (g) of this (iv) Absorbent circulation pump type
standard conditions. section. (natural gas pneumatic/air pneumatic/
As = Natural gas driven pneumatic valve (ii) Follow the method in § 98.234(i)(3) if electric).
actuator natural gas emission in manufacturer data are not available. (v) Absorbent circulation rate.
‘‘emission per actuation’’ units at (5) Blowdown vent stacks. Calculate
standard conditions, as provided by the fugitive emissions from blowdown vent (vi) Absorbent type: Including, but not
manufacturer. stacks as follows: limited to, triethylene glycol (TEG),
N = Number of times the pneumatic device (i) Calculate the total volume (including, diethylene glycol (DEG) or ethylene
was actuated in a way that vented but not limited to pipelines and vessels) glycol (EG).
natural gas to the atmosphere through between isolation valves (Vv in Equation W– (vii) Use of stripping natural gas.
the reporting period. 4 of this subpart).
(ii) Retain logs of the number of
(viii) Use of flash tank separator (and
(D) Calculate both CH4 and CO2 disposition of recovered gas).
volumetric and mass fugitive emissions blowdowns for each equipment type.
(iii) Calculate the total annual fugitive (ix) Hours operated.
from volumetric natural gas fugitive emissions using the following Equation W–
emissions using calculations in (x) Wet natural gas temperature,
4 of this section: pressure, and composition.
paragraphs (f) and (g) of this section.
(ii) Follow the method in Ea,n = N ∗ Vv (Eq. W-4) (7) Flare stacks. Calculate fugitive
§ 98.234(i)(2) if manufacturer data are emissions from a flare stack as follows:
not available. Where: (i) Determine flare combustion
(4) Natural gas driven pneumatic Ea,n = Natural gas fugitive emissions at efficiency from manufacturer. If not
valve bleed devices. Calculate fugitive ambient conditions from blowdowns. available, assume that flare combustion
emissions from a natural gas driven N = Number of blowdowns for the equipment efficiency is 95 percent for non-steam
pneumatic valve bleed device as in reporting year.
Vv = Total volume of blowdown equipment
aspirated flares and 98 percent for steam
follows: aspirated or air injected flares.
(i) Calculate fugitive emissions using chambers (including, but not limited to,
manufacturer data. pipelines and vessels) between isolation (ii) Calculate volume of natural gas
(A) Obtain from the manufacturer valves. sent to flare from velocity measurement
specific pneumatic device model (iv) Calculate natural gas volumetric in § 98.234(j) using manufacturer’s
natural gas bleed rate during normal fugitive emissions at standard manual for the specific meter used to
operation. conditions using calculations in measure velocity.
(B) Calculate the natural gas fugitive paragraph (e) of this section. (iii) Calculate GHG volumetric
emissions for each valve bleed device (v) Calculate both CH4 and CO2 fugitive emissions at actual conditions
using Equation W–3 of this section. volumetric and mass fugitive emissions using Equation W–5 of this section:
Ea,i = Va × (1 − η ) × X i + (1 − K ) ∗η ∗ Va ∗ Y j ∗ R j,i
EP10AP09.097</MATH>
(Eq. W-5)
Where: K = ‘‘1’’ when GHG i is CH4 and ‘‘0’’ when Ta = Temperature at actual emission
Ea,i = Annual fugitive emissions from flare GHG i is CO2. conditions (°F).
EP10AP09.096</MATH>
stack. Ps = Absolute pressure at standard conditions
Va = Volume of natural gas sent to flare stack (iv) Calculate GHG volumetric fugitive (inches of Hg).
determined from § 98.234(j)(1). emissions at standard conditions using Pa = Absolute pressure at ambient conditions
h = Percent of natural gas combusted by flare Equation W–6 of this section. (inches of Hg).
(default is 95 percent for non-steam
(v) Calculate both CH4 and CO2 mass
EP10AP09.095</MATH>
Ea,i ∗ ( 460 + Ts ) ∗ Pa
aspirated flares and 98 percent for steam
aspirated or air injected flares). fugitive emissions from volumetric CH4
Es,i = (Eq. W-6)
Xi = Concentration of GHG i in the flare gas
determined from § 98.234(j)(1).
( 460 + Ta ) ∗ Ps and CO2 fugitive emissions using
calculations in paragraph (g) of this
Yj = Concentration of natural gas Where: section.
hydrocarbon constituents j (such as
EP10AP09.094</MATH>
Es,i = Natural gas volumetric fugitive (8) Storage tanks. Calculate fugitive
methane, ethane, propane, butane, and emissions from a storage tank as
pentanes plus). emissions at standard temperature and
Rj,i = Number of carbon atoms in the natural pressure (STP) conditions. follows:
gas hydrocarbon constituent j; 1 for Ea,i = Natural gas volumetric fugitive (i) Calculate the total annual
methane, 2 for ethane, 3 for propane, 4 emissions at actual conditions. hydrocarbon vapor fugitive emissions
EP10AP09.093</MATH>
for butane, and 5 for pentanes plus). Ts = Temperature at standard conditions (°F). using Equation W–7 of this section:
Ea,h = Q × ER (Eq. W-7) Ta = Temperature at actual emission § 98.234 Monitoring and QA/QC
conditions (°F). requirements.
Where: Ps = Absolute pressure at standard conditions (a) You must use the methods
Ea,h = Hydrocarbon vapor fugitive emissions (inches of Hg). described in paragraphs (d) or (e) in this
at actual conditions. Pa = Absolute pressure at ambient conditions
(inches of Hg). section to conduct annual leak detection
Q = Storage tank total annual throughput. of fugitive emissions from all sources
ER = Measured hydrocarbon vapor emissions (f) Calculate GHG volumetric fugitive
rate per throughput (e.g. cubic feet/
listed in § 98.232(a), whether in
emissions at standard conditions as operation or on standby. If fugitive
barrel) determined from § 98.234(j)(2). specified in paragraphs (f)(1) and (2) of emissions are detected for sources listed
(ii) Estimate hydrocarbon vapor this section. in paragraph (b) of this section, you
volumetric fugitive emissions at (1) Estimate CH4 and CO2 fugitive must use the measurement methods
standard conditions using calculations emissions from natural gas fugitive described in paragraph(c) of this section
in paragraph (e) of this section. emissions using Equation W–10 of this to measure emissions from each source
(iii) Estimate CH4 and CO2 volumetric section. with fugitive emissions.
fugitive emissions from volumetric (b) You shall use detection
hydrocarbon fugitive emissions using Es,i = Es,n ∗ M i (Eq. W-10) instruments described in paragraphs (d)
Equation W–8 of this section. and (e) of this section to monitor the
Where:
Es,i = GHG i (either CH4 or CO2) volumetric following fugitive emissions:
Es,i = Es,h ∗ M i (Eq. W-8) fugitive emissions at standard (1) Centrifugal compressor dry seals
Where: conditions. fugitive emissions.
Es,i = GHG i (either CH4 or CO2) volumetric Es,n = Natural gas volumetric fugitive (2) Centrifugal compressor wet seals
fugitive emissions at standard emissions at standard conditions. fugitive emissions.
conditions. Mi = Mole percent of GHG i in the natural (3) Compressor fugitive emissions.
Es,h = Hydrocarbon vapor volumetric fugitive gas. (4) LNG import and export facility
emissions at standard conditions. (2) For Equation W–10 of this section, fugitive emissions.
Mi = Mole percent of a particular GHG i in the mole percent, Mi, shall be the (5) LNG storage station fugitive
the hydrocarbon vapors; hydrocarbon annual average mole percent for each emissions.
vapor analysis shall be conducted in facility, as specified in paragraphs (6) Non-pneumatic pumps fugitive
accordance with ASTM D1945–03. emissions.
(f)(2)(i) through (vi) of this section.
(iv) Estimate CH4 and CO2 mass (i) GHG mole percent in produced (7) Open-ended lines (OELs) fugitive
fugitive emissions from GHG volumetric natural gas for offshore petroleum and emissions.
fugitive emissions using calculations in natural gas production facilities. (8) Pump seals fugitive emissions.
paragraph (g) of this section. (ii) GHG mole percent in feed natural (9) Offshore platform pipeline fugitive
(9) Compressor wet seal degassing gas for all fugitive emissions sources emissions.
vents. Calculate fugitive emissions from upstream of the de-methanizer and GHG (10) Platform fugitive emissions.
compressor wet seal degassing vents as mole percent in facility specific residue (11) Processing facility fugitive
follows: gas to transmission pipeline systems for emissions.
(i) Calculate volume of natural gas all fugitive emissions sources (12) Reciprocating compressor rod
sent to vent from velocity measurement downstream of the de-methanizer for packing fugitive emissions.
in § 98.234(j) using manufacturer’s onshore natural gas processing facilities. (13) Storage station fugitive
manual for the specific meter used to (iii) GHG mole percent in emissions.
measure velocity. transmission pipeline natural gas that (14) Transmission station fugitive
(ii) Calculate natural gas volumetric passes through the facility for onshore emissions.
fugitive emissions at standard natural gas transmission compression (15) Storage wellhead fugitive
conditions using calculations in facilities. emissions.
paragraph (e) of this section. (iv) GHG mole percent in natural gas (c) You shall use a high volume
(iii) Calculate both CH4 and CO2 stored in underground natural gas sampler, described in paragraph (f) of
volumetric and mass fugitive emissions storage facilities. this section, to measure fugitive
from volumetric natural gas fugitive (v) GHG mole percent in natural gas emissions from the sources detected in
EP10AP09.102</MATH>
emissions using calculations in stored in LNG storage facilities. § 98.234(b), except as provided in
paragraphs (f) and (g) of this section. (vi) GHG mole percent in natural gas paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section:
(e) Calculate natural gas volumetric stored in LNG import and export (1) Where high volume samplers
fugitive emissions at standard facilities. cannot capture all of the fugitive
conditions by converting ambient (g) Calculate GHG mass fugitive emissions, you shall use calibrated bags EP10AP09.101</MATH>
temperature and pressure of natural gas emissions at standard conditions by described in paragraph (g) of this
fugitive emissions to standard converting the GHG volumetric fugitive section or meters described in paragraph
temperature and pressure natural using emissions into mass fugitive emissions (h) of this section to measure the
Equation W–9 of this section. using Equation W–11 of this section. following fugitive emissions:
EP10AP09.100</MATH>
(i) Open-ended lines (OELs).

Ea,n ∗ ( 460 + Ts ) ∗ Pa Masss,i = Es,i ∗ ρ i (Eq. W-11) (ii) Centrifugal compressor dry seals
Es,n = (Eq. W-9) fugitive emissions.
( 460 + Ta ) ∗ Ps Where:
(iii) Centrifugal compressor wet seals
Masss,i = GHG i (either CH4 or CO2) mass
Where: fugitive emissions.
fugitive emissions at standard
EP10AP09.099</MATH>
Es,n = Natural gas volumetric fugitive conditions.

(iv) Compressor fugitive emissions.
emissions at standard temperature and Es,i = GHG i (either CH4 or CO2) volumetric (v) Pump seals fugitive emissions.
pressure (STP) conditions. fugitive emissions at standard (vi) Reciprocating compressor rod
Ea,n = Natural gas volumetric fugitive conditions. packing fugitive emissions.
emissions at actual conditions. ri = Density of GHG i;1.87 kg/m3 for CO2 and (vii) Flare stacks and storage tanks,
EP10AP09.098</MATH>
Ts = Temperature at standard conditions (°F). 0.68 kg/m3 for CH4. except that you shall use meters in
combination with engineering conversant with all operating emissions using calculations in
estimation methods to calculate fugitive procedures and measurement § 98.233(f) and (g).
emissions. methodologies relevant to using a high (4) Calibrate the meter using either
(2) Use hot wire anemometer to volume sampler, including, but not one of the two methods provided as
calculate fugitive emissions from limited to, positioning the instrument follows:
centrifugal compressor wet seal for complete capture of the fugitive (i) Develop calibration curves by
degassing vents and flares where it is emissions without creating backpressure following the manufacturer’s
unsafe or too high a flow rate to use on the source. instruction.
calibrated bags. (2) If the high volume sampler, along (ii) Weigh the amount of gas that
(d) Infrared Remote Fugitive with all attachments available from the flows through the meter into or out of
Emissions Detection. manufacturer, is not able to capture all a container during the calibration
(1) Use infrared fugitive emissions the emissions from the source then you procedure using a master weigh scale
detection instruments that can identify shall use anti-static wraps or other aids (approved by National Institute of
specific equipment sources as emitting. to capture all emissions without Standards and Technology (NIST) or
Such instruments must have the violating operating requirements as calibrated using standards traceable by
capability to trace a fugitive emission provided in the instrument NIST). Determine correction factors for
back to the specific point where it manufacturer’s manual. the flow meter according to the
escapes the process and enters the (3) Estimate CH4 and CO2 volumetric manufacturer’s instructions. Record
atmosphere. and mass emissions from volumetric deviations from the correct reading at
(2) If you are using instruments that natural gas emissions using the several flow rates. Plot the data points,
visually display an image of fugitive calculations in § 98.233(f) and (g). comparing the flowmeter output to the
emissions, you shall inspect the (4) Calibrate the instrument at 2.5 actual flowrate as determined by the
emissions source from multiple angles percent methane with 97.5 percent air master weigh scale and use the
or locations until the entire source has and 100 percent CH4 by using calibrated difference as a correction factor.
been viewed without visual obstructions gas samples and by following (i) Where engineering estimation as
at least once annually. manufacturer’s instructions for described in § 98.233 is not possible,
(3) If you are using any other infrared calibration. use direct measurement methods as
detection instruments, such as those (g) Use calibrated bags (also known as follows:
based on infrared laser reflection, you (1) If manufacturer data on pneumatic
vent bags) only where the emissions are
shall monitor all potential emission pump natural gas emission are not
at near-atmospheric pressures and the
points at least once annually. available, conduct a one-time
entire fugitive emissions volume can be
(4) Perform fugitive emissions measurement to determine natural gas
captured for measurement.
detection under favorable conditions, emission per unit volume of liquid
(1) Hold the bag in place enclosing the
including but not limited to during pumped using a calibrated bag for each
emissions source to capture the entire
daylight hours, in the absence of pneumatic pump, when it is pumping
emissions and record the time required
precipitation, in the absence of high liquids. Determine the volume of liquid
for completely filling the bag.
wind, and, for active laser devices, in being pumped from the manufacturer’s
(2) Perform three measurements of the
front of appropriate reflective manual to provide the amount of natural
time required to fill the bag; report the
backgrounds within the detection range gas emitted per unit of liquid pumped.
emissions as the average of the three (i) Record natural gas conditions
of the instrument.
(5) Use fugitive emissions detection readings. (temperature and pressure) and convert
and measurement instrument manuals (3) Estimate natural gas volumetric natural gas emission per unit volume of
to determine optimal operating emissions at standard conditions using liquid pumped at actual conditions into
conditions. calculations in § 98.233(e). natural gas emission per pumping cycle
(e) Use organic vapor analyzers (4) Estimate CH4 and CO2 volumetric at standard conditions using Equation
(OVAs) and toxic vapor analyzers and mass emissions from volumetric W–9 of § 98.233.
(TVAs) for all fugitive emissions natural gas emissions using the (ii) Calculate annual fugitive
detection that are safely accessible at calculations in § 98.233(f) and (g). emissions from the pump using
close-range. (5) Obtain consistent results when Equation W–1, by replacing the
(1) Check each potential emissions measuring the time it takes to fill the manufacturer’s data on emission
source, all joints, connections, and other bag with fugitive emissions. (variable Fs) in the Equation with the
potential paths to the atmosphere for (h) Channel all emissions from a standard conditions natural gas
emissions. single source directly through the meter emission calculated in § 98.234(i)(1)(i).
(2) Evaluate the lag time between the when using metering (e.g., rotameters, (iii) Estimate CH4 and CO2 volumetric
instrument sensing and alerting caused turbine meters, and others). and mass fugitive emissions from
by the residence time of a sample in the (1) Use an appropriately sized meter volumetric natural gas fugitive
probe shall be evaluated; upon alert, the so that the flow does not exceed the full emissions using calculations in
instrument shall be slowly retraced over range of the meter in the course of § 98.233(f) and (g).
the source to pinpoint the location of measurement and conversely has (2) If manufacturer data on pneumatic
fugitive emissions. sufficient momentum for the meter to manual valve actuator device natural
(3) Use Method 21 of 40 CFR part 60, register continuously in the course of gas emission are not available, conduct
appendix A–7, Determination of measurement. a one-time measurement to determine
Volatile Organic Compound Leaks to (2) Estimate natural gas volumetric natural gas emission per actuation using
calibrate OVAs and TVAs. fugitive emissions at standard a calibrated bag for each pneumatic
(f) Use a high volume sampler to conditions using calculations in device per actuation.
measure only cold and steady emissions § 98.233(f). (i) Record natural gas conditions
within the capacity of the instrument. (3) Estimate CH4 and CO2 volumetric (temperature and pressure) and convert
(1) A trained technician shall conduct and mass fugitive emissions from natural gas emission at actual
measurements. The technician shall be volumetric natural gas fugitive conditions into natural gas emission per
actuation at standard conditions using representative of the normal operating (b) Emissions reported separately for
Equation W–9 of this subpart. conditions of the storage tank standby equipment.
(ii) Calculate annual fugitive throughout the year and which includes (c) Emissions calculated for these
emissions from the pneumatic device a complete cycle of accumulation of sources shall assume no CO2 capture
using Equation W–2 of this section, by hydrocarbon liquids and pumping out and transfer off site.
replacing the manufacturer’s data on of hydrocarbon liquids from the storage (d) Activity data for each aggregated
emission (variable As) in the Equation tank. source type level for which emissions
with the standard conditions natural gas (ii) Record the net (related to working are being reported.
emission calculated in § 98.234(i)(2)(i). loss) and gross (related to flashing loss) (e) Engineering estimate of total
(iii) Estimate CH4 and CO2 volumetric input of the storage tank during the test component count.
and mass emissions from volumetric period. (f) Total number of compressors and
natural gas fugitive emissions using the (iii) Record temperature and pressure average operating hours per year for
calculations in § 98.233(f) and (g). of hydrocarbon vapors emitted during compressors for each operation listed in
(3) If manufacturer data on natural gas the test period. paragraphs (a)(1) through (6) of this
driven pneumatic valve bleed rate is not (iv) Collect a sample of hydrocarbon section.
available, conduct a one-time vapors for composition analysis (g) Minimum, maximum and average
measurement to determine natural gas (k) Component fugitive emissions throughput for each operation listed in
bleed rate using a high volume sampler sources that are not safely accessible paragraphs (a)(1) through (6) of this
or calibrated bag or meter for each within the operator’s arm’s reach from section.
pneumatic device. the ground or stationary platforms are (h) Specification of the type of any
(i) Record natural gas conditions excluded from the requirements of this control device used, including flares, for
(temperature and pressure) to convert section. any source type listed in 98.232(a).
natural gas bleed rate at actual (1) Determine annual emissions (i) For offshore petroleum and natural
assuming that the fugitive emissions gas production facilities, the number of
conditions into natural gas bleed rate at
were continuous from the beginning of connected wells, and whether they are
standard conditions using Equation W–
the reporting period or last recorded producing oil, gas, or both.
9 of this subpart. (j) Detection and measurement
(ii) Calculate annual fugitive zero detection in the current reporting
period and continuing until the fugitive instruments used.
emissions from the pneumatic device
using Equation W–3 of this subpart, by emissions is repaired. § 98.237 Records that must be retained.
replacing the manufacturer’s data on § 98.235 Procedures for estimating In addition to the information
bleed rate (variable B) in the equation missing data. required by § 98.3(g), you must retain
with the standard conditions bleed rate There are no missing data procedures the following records:
calculated in § 98.234(i)(3)(i). for this source category. A complete (a) Dates on which measurements
(iii) Estimate CH4 and CO2 volumetric record of all measured parameters used were conducted.
and mass fugitive emissions from in the GHG emissions calculations is (b) Results of all emissions detected,
volumetric natural gas fugitive required. If data are lost or an error whether quantification was made
emissions using calculations in occurs during annual emissions pursuant to § 98.234(k) and
§ 98.233(f) and (g). measurements, you must repeat the measurements.
(j) Parameters for calculating (c) Calibration reports for detection
measurement activity for those sources
emissions from flare stacks, compressor and measurement instruments used.
until a valid measurement is obtained. (d) Inputs and outputs of calculations
wet seal degassing vents, and storage
tanks. § 98.236 Data reporting requirements. or emissions computer model runs used
(1) Estimate fugitive emissions from In addition to the information for engineering estimation of emissions.
flare stacks and compressor wet seal required by § 98.3(c), each annual report § 98.238 Definitions.
degassing vents as follows: must report emissions data as specified
(i) Insert flow velocity measuring All terms used in this subpart have
in this section. the same meaning given in the Clean Air
device (such as hot wire anemometer or (a) Annual emissions reported
pitot tube) directly upstream of the flare Act and subpart A of this part.
separately for each of the operations
stack or compressor wet seal degassing listed in paragraphs (a)(1) through (6) of Subpart X—Petrochemical Production
vent to determine the velocity of gas this section. Within each operation,
sent to flare or vent. emissions from each source type must § 98.240 Definition of the source category.
(ii) Record actual temperature and be reported in the aggregate. For (a) The petrochemical production
pressure conditions of the gas sent to example, an underground natural gas source category consists of any facility
flare or vent. storage facility with multiple that produces acrylonitrile, carbon
(iii) Sample representative gas to the reciprocating compressors must report black, ethylene, ethylene dichloride,
flare stack or compressor wet seal emissions from all reciprocating ethylene oxide, or methanol as an
degassing vent every quarter to evaluate compressors as an aggregate number. intended product, except as specified in
the composition of GHGs present in the (1) Offshore petroleum and natural paragraph (b) of this section.
stream. Record the average of the most gas production facilities. (b) An integrated process is part of the
recent four gas composition analyses, (2) Onshore natural gas processing petrochemical source category only if
which shall be conducted using ASTM facilities. the petrochemical is the primary
D1945–03 (incorporated by reference, (3) Onshore natural gas transmission product of the integrated process.
see § 98.7). compression facilities.
(2) Estimate fugitive emissions from (4) Underground natural gas storage § 98.241 Reporting threshold.
storage tanks as follows: facilities. You must report GHG emissions
(i) Measure the hydrocarbon vapor (5) Liquefied natural gas storage under this subpart if your facility
emissions from storage tanks using a facilities. contains a petrochemical production
flow meter described in paragraph (h) of (6) Liquefied natural gas import and process and the facility meets the
this section for a test period that is export facilities. requirements of either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2).
§ 98.242 GHGs to report. § 98.243 Calculating GHG emissions. (ii) Measure the mass rate of each
You must report the information in (a) Determine process-based GHG solid feedstock and product by
paragraphs (a) through (d) of this emissions in accordance with the following the procedures outlined in
section: procedures specified in either paragraph § 98.244(b)(1) and record the total for
(a) CO2 emissions from each (a)(1) or (2) of this section, and if each calendar week.
petrochemical process unit, following applicable, comply with the procedures (iii) Collect a sample of each feedstock
the methods and procedures in in paragraph (b) of this section. and product at least once per week and
§§ 98.243 through 98.248. You must (1) Continuous emission monitoring determine the carbon content of each
include the volume of any CO2 captured system (CEMS). sample according to the procedures in
from process off-gas in the reported CO2 (i) If you operate and maintain a § 98.244(b)(3).
emissions. CEMS that measures total CO2 (iv) If you determine that the weekly
(b) CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions from emissions from process vents and average concentration of a specific
stationary combustion units. For each combustion sources according to compound in a feedstock or product is
stationary combustion unit, you must subpart C of this part, you must estimate always greater than 99.5 percent by
follow the calculation methods and total CO2 emissions according to the volume (or mass for liquids and solids),
other requirements specified in subpart Tier 4 Calculation Methodology then as an alternative to the sampling
C of this part. If you determine CO2 requirements in § 98.33(a)(4). For each and analysis specified in paragraph
process-based emissions in accordance flare, estimate CO2, CH4, and N2O (a)(2)(iii) of this section, you may
with § 98.243(a)(2), then for each emissions using the methodology calculate the carbon content assuming
stationary combustion unit that burns specified in § 98.253(b)(1) and (2). 100 percent of that feedstock or product
off-gas from a petrochemical process, (ii) If you elect to install CEMS to is the specific compound during periods
estimate CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions comply with this subpart, you must of normal operation. You must maintain
for the combustion of supplemental fuel route all process vent emissions to one records of any determination made in
in accordance with subpart C of this or more stacks and use a CEMS on each accordance with this paragraph along
part. In addition, estimate CH4 and N2O stack (except flare stacks) to measure with all supporting data, calculations,
emissions from combusting off-gas CO2 emissions. You must estimate total and other information. This alternative
according to the requirements in CO2 emissions according to the Tier 4 may not be used for products during
§ 98.33(c)(2) and (3) using the emission Calculation Methodology requirements periods of operation when off-
factors for Refinery Gas in Table C–3 in in § 98.33(a)(4). For each flare, estimate specification product is produced. You
subpart C of this part. CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions using the must reevaluate determinations made
(c) CO2 captured. You must follow the methodology specified in § 98.253(b)(1) under this paragraph after any process
calculation procedures, monitoring and and (2) of subpart Y of this part. change that affects the feedstock or
QA/QC methods, missing data (2) Mass balance for each product composition. You must keep
procedures, reporting requirements, and petrochemical process unit. Estimate the records of the process change and the
recordkeeping requirements specified in emissions of CO2 from each process corresponding composition
subpart PP of this part. unit, for each calendar week as determinations. If the feedstock or
(d) CH4 emissions for each on-site described in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through product composition changes so that the
wastewater treatment system. For (v) of this section. average weekly concentration falls
wastewater treatment systems, you must (i) Measure the volume of each below 99.5 percent, you are no longer
follow the calculation procedures, gaseous and liquid feedstock and permitted to use this alternative
monitoring and QA/QC methods, product continuously with a flow meter method.
missing data procedures, reporting by following the procedures outlined in (v) Estimate CO2 mass emissions for
requirements, and recordkeeping § 98.244(b)(2). Fuels used for each petrochemical process unit using
requirements specified in subpart II of combustion purposes are not considered Equations X–1 through X–4 of this
this part. to be feedstocks. section:
52 j or k ⎡ ( MW ) ( MW ) ⎤⎥
Cg = ∑ ∑ ⎢⎢( F ) ∗ ( CC ) − ( Pgp ) ∗ ( CCgp ) ∗
f p i
gf gf ∗ i
(Eq. X-1)
n =1 i=1
i,n i,n MVC i,n i,n MVC ⎥
⎣ ⎦
Where: (CCgf)i,n = Average carbon content of the (CCgp)i,n = Average carbon content of gaseous
Cg = Annual net contribution to estimated gaseous feedstock i for week ‘‘n’’ (kg C product i, including streams containing
emissions from carbon (C) in gaseous per kg of feedstock). CO2 recovered for sale or use in another
(MWf)i = Molecular weight of gaseous process, for week ‘‘n’’ (kg C per kg of
feedstocks (kilograms/year, kg/yr).
feedstock i (kg/kg-mole). product).
(Fgf)i,n = Volume of gaseous feedstock i MVC = Molar volume conversion factor
introduced in week ‘‘n’’ (standard cubic (MWp)i = Molecular weight of gaseous
(849.5 scf per kg-mole at standard
feet, scf). conditions). product i (kg/kg-mole).
(Pgp)i,n = Volume of gaseous product i j = Number of feedstocks.
produced in week ‘‘n’’ (scf). k = Number of products.
EP10AP09.104</MATH>
52 j or k
Cl = ∑
n=1
∑ (F )
i =1
lf i,n
∗ ( CClf ) i,n
− ( Plp ) ∗ ( CClp )
i,n i,n
(Eq. X-2)
EP10AP09.103</MATH>
Where: (Flf)i,n = Volume of liquid feedstock i (Plp)i,n = Volume of liquid product i produced
Cl = Annual net contribution to estimated introduced in week ‘‘n’’ (gallons). in week ‘‘n’’ (gallons).
emissions from carbon in liquid (CClf)i,n = Average carbon content of liquid (CClp)i,n = Average carbon content of liquid
feedstock i for week ‘‘n’’ (kg C per gallon product i, including organic liquid
feedstocks (kg/yr).
of feedstock). wastes, for week ‘‘n’’ (kg C per gallon of
product).
52 j or k
Cs = ∑
n =1
∑ (F )
i =1
sf i,n
∗ ( CCsf )
i,n
− ( Psp ) ∗ ( CCsp ) ⎤
i,n i,n ⎦
(Eq. X-3)
Where: (Fsf)i,n = Mass of solid feedstock i introduced (Psp)i,n = Mass of solid product i produced in
Cs = Annual net contribution to estimated in week ‘‘n’’ (kg). week ‘‘n’’ (kg).
emissions from carbon in solid (CCsf)i,n = Average carbon content of solid (CCsp)i,n = Average carbon content of solid
feedstock i for week ‘‘n’’ (kg C per kg of product i in week ‘‘n’’ (kg C per kg of
feedstocks (kg/yr).
feedstock). product).
∗ ( C g + Cl + Cs )
44
CO 2 = 0.001 ∗ (Eq. X-4)
12
Where: product for each process unit chromatograph using the procedures in
CO2 = Annual CO2 mass emissions from continuously with a flow meter. All the method prior to each use. For coal
process operations and fuel gas feedstock and product flow meters must used as a feedstock, the samples for
combustion (metric tons/year). be calibrated prior to the first reporting carbon content determinations shall be
0.001 = Conversion factor from kg to metric year, using any applicable method taken at a location that is representative
tons. of the coal feedstock used during the
incorporated by reference in § 98.7(b)(1)
44 = Molecular weight of CO2 (kg/kg-mole).
12 = Atomic weight of carbon (C) (kg/kg- through (6), (c)(1), (f)(3)(i) through (ii), corresponding weekly period. For
mole). or (g)(1). You should use the flow meter carbon black products, samples shall be
accuracy test procedures in appendix D taken of each grade or type of product
(b) If you have an integrated process to part 75 of this chapter. Alternatively, produced during the weekly period.
unit that is determined to be part of the calibration procedures specified by the Samples of coal feedstock or carbon
petrochemical production source equipment manufacturer may be used. black product for carbon content
category, comply with paragraph (a) of Flow meters and gas composition determinations may be either grab
this section by including terms for monitors shall be recalibrated annually samples collected and analyzed weekly
additional carbon-containing products or at the frequency specified by another or a composite of samples collected
in Equations X–1 through X–3 of this applicable rule or the manufacturer, more frequently and analyzed weekly.
section as necessary. whichever is more frequent.
§ 98.244 Monitoring and QA/QC (3) Collect a sample of each feedstock missing data.
requirements. and product for each process unit at
(a) Each facility that uses CEMS to least once per week and determine the (a) For missing feedstock flow rates,
estimate emissions from process vents carbon content of each sample using an product flow rates, and carbon contents,
must comply with the procedures applicable ASTM method incorporated use the same procedures as for missing
specified in § 98.34(e). by reference in § 98.7(a)(15), (23), or flow rates and carbon contents for fuels
(b) Facilities that use the mass balance (24). Alternatively, you may determine as specified in § 98.35.
methodology in § 98.243(a)(2) must the composition of the sample using a (b) For missing CO2 concentration,
comply with paragraphs (b)(1) through gas chromatograph and then calculate stack gas flow rate, and moisture
(3) of this section. the carbon content based on the content for CEMS on any process vent
(1) Measure the mass rate of each composition and molecular weights for stack, follow the applicable procedures
solid feedstock and product (e.g., using compounds in the sample. Determine specified in § 98.35.
belt scales or weighing at the loadout the composition of gas and liquid
§ 98.246 Data reporting requirements.
points of your process unit) and record samples using either: ASTM D1945–03
the total for each calendar week. You incorporated by reference in § 98.7 (a)(8) (a) Facilities using the mass balance
must document procedures used to of subpart A of this part; ASTM D6060– methodology in § 98.243(a)(2) must
ensure the accuracy of the 96(2001) incorporated by reference in report the information specified in
measurements of the feedstock and § 98.7; ASTM D2502–88(2004)e1 paragraphs (a)(1) through (9) of this
product flows including, but not limited incorporated by reference in § 98.7; section for each type of petrochemical
to, calibration of all weighing method UOP539–97 incorporated by produced, reported by process unit.
equipment and other measurement reference in § 98.7; or EPA Method 18, (1) Identification of the petrochemical
devices. The estimated accuracy of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A–6; or process.
EP10AP09.106</MATH>
measurements made with these devices Methods 8031, 8021, or 8015 in ‘‘Test
shall be recorded, and the technical Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, (2) Annual CO2e emissions calculated
basis for these estimates shall be Physical/Chemical Methods,’’ EPA using Equation X–4 of this subpart.
recorded. Publication No. SW–846, Third Edition, (3) Methods used to determine
(2) Measure the volume of each September 1986, as amended by Update feedstock and product flows and carbon
EP10AP09.105</MATH>
gaseous and liquid feedstock and I, November 15, 1992. Calibrate the gas contents.
(4) Number of actual and substitute (compressors, pumps, valves, pressure requirements, and recordkeeping
data points for each measured relief devices, flanges, and connectors) requirements of subpart II of this part.
parameter. in gas service; marine vessel, barge, (k) CO2 and CH4 emissions from non-
(5) Annual quantity of each feedstock tanker truck, and similar loading merchant hydrogen production. You
consumed. operations; flares; land disposal units; must follow the calculation procedures,
(6) Annual quantity of each product sulfur recovery plants. hydrogen plants monitoring and QA/QC methods,
and by-product produced, including all (non-merchant plants only). missing data procedures, reporting
products from integrated processes that requirements, and recordkeeping
are part of the petrochemical production § 98.251 Reporting threshold. requirements of subpart P of this part.
source category. You must report GHG emissions
under this subpart if your facility § 98.253 Calculating GHG emissions.
(7) Each carbon content measurement
for each feedstock, product, and by- contains a petroleum refineries process (a) For stationary combustion sources,
product. and the facility meets the requirements if you operate and maintain a CEMS that
(8) All calculations, measurements, of either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2). measures total CO2 emissions according
equipment calibrations, certifications, to subpart C of this part, you must
§ 98.252 GHGs to report. estimate total CO2 emissions according
and other information used to assess the
You must report: to the requirements in § 98.33(a)(4).
uncertainty in emission estimates and
(a) CO2, CH4, and N2O combustion (b) For flares, calculate GHG
the underlying volumetric flow rates,
emissions from stationary combustion emissions according to the requirements
mass flow rates, and carbon contents of
sources and from each flare. For each in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this
feedstocks and products.
stationary combustion unit, you must section for combustion systems fired
(9) Identification of any combustion
follow the calculation procedures, with refinery fuel gas.
units that burned process off-gas.
monitoring and QA/QC methods, (1) Calculate the CO2 emissions
(b) Each facility that uses CEMS to
missing data procedures, reporting according to the applicable
determine emissions from process vents
requirements, and recordkeeping requirements in paragraphs (b)(1)(i)
must report the verification data
requirements specified in subpart C of through (iii) of this section.
specified in § 98.36(d)(1)(iv). (i) Flow measurement. If you have a
this part.
§ 98.247 Records that must be retained. (b) CO2, CH4, and N2O coke burn-off continuous flow monitor on the flare,
In addition to the recordkeeping emissions from each catalytic cracking you must use the measured flow rates
requirements in § 98.3(g), you must unit, fluid coking unit, and catalytic when the monitor is operational, to
retain the following records: reforming unit. calculate the flare gas flow. If you do not
(a) The CEMS recordkeeping (c) CO2 emissions from sour gas sent have a continuous flow monitor on the
requirements in § 98.37, if you operate off site for sulfur recovery operations. flare, you must use engineering
a CEMS on process vents. You must follow the calculation calculations, company records, or
(b) Results of feedstock or product procedures from § 98.253(f) of this similar estimates of volumetric flare gas
composition determinations conducted subpart and the monitoring and QA/QC flow.
methods, missing data procedures, (ii) Carbon content. If you have a
in accordance with § 98.243(a)(2)(iv).
reporting requirements, and continuous higher heating value
(c) Start and end times and calculated
recordkeeping requirements of this monitor or carbon content monitor on
carbon contents for time periods when
subpart of this part. the flare or if you monitor these
off-specification product is produced, if
(d) CO2 process emissions from each parameters at least daily, you must use
you comply with the alternative
on-site sulfur recovery plant. the measured heat value or carbon
methodology in § 98.243(a)(2)(iv) for
(e) CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions from content value in calculating the CO2
determining carbon content of feedstock
each coke calcining unit. emissions from the flare. If you monitor
or product.
(f) CO2 emissions from asphalt carbon content, calculate the CO2
§ 98.248 Definitions. blowing operations controlled using a emissions from the flare using the
All terms used in this subpart have combustion device and CH4 emissions applicable equation in § 98.33(a). If you
the same meaning given in the Clean Air from asphalt blowing operations not monitor heat content, calculate the CO2
Act and subpart A of this part. controlled by a combustion device. emissions from the flare using the
(g) CH4 fugitive emissions from applicable equation in § 98.33(a) and the
Subpart Y—Petroleum Refineries equipment leaks, storage tanks, loading default emission factor of 60 kilograms
operations, delayed coking units, and CO2/MMBtu on a higher heating value
§ 98.250 Definition of source category. uncontrolled blowdown systems. basis.
(a) A petroleum refinery is any facility (h) CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions from (iii) Startup, shutdown, malfunction.
engaged in producing gasoline, each process vent not specifically If you do not measure the higher heating
kerosene, distillate fuel oils, residual included in paragraphs (a) through (g) of value or carbon content of the flare gas
fuel oils, lubricants, asphalt (bitumen) this section. at least daily, determine the quantity of
or other products through distillation of (i) CH4 emissions from on-site gas discharged to the flare separately for
petroleum or through redistillation, landfills. You must follow the periods of routine flare operation and
cracking, or reforming of unfinished calculation procedures, monitoring and for periods of start-up, shutdown, or
petroleum derivatives. QA/QC methods, missing data malfunction, and calculate the CO2
(b) This source category consists of procedures, reporting requirements, and emissions as specified in paragraphs
the following sources at petroleum recordkeeping requirements of subpart (b)(1)(iii)(A) through (C) of this section.
refineries: Catalytic cracking units; fluid HH of this part. (A) For periods of start-up, shutdown,
coking units; delayed coking units; (j) CO2 and CH4 emissions from on- or malfunction, use engineering
catalytic reforming units; coke calcining site wastewater treatment. You must calculations and process knowledge to
units; asphalt blowing operations; follow the calculation procedures, estimate the carbon content of the flared
blowdown systems; storage tanks; monitoring and QA/QC methods, gas for each start-up, shutdown, or
process equipment components missing data procedures, reporting malfunction event.
(B) For periods of normal operation, for the refinery fuel gas for the heating (C) Calculate the CO2 emissions using
use the average heating value measured value of the flare gas. Equation Y–1 of this section.
n
44
CO2 = FlareN ∗ HHV ∗ (0.001 ∗ EmF ) + ∑ ∗ ( FlareSSM ) p ∗ (CC ) p (Eq. Y-1)
p =1 12
Where: malfunctions from engineering Calculation Methodology requirements

CO2 = Annual CO2 emissions for a specific calculations, (MMscf/event). in § 98.33(a)(4). For units that do not
fuel type (metric tons/year). (CC)p = Average carbon content of the have a CO boiler or other post-
FlareN = Annual volume of flare gas gaseous fuel, from the fuel analysis
results or engineering calculations for
combustion device, Equation Y–3 of this
combusted during normal operations section may be used as an alternative to
the event (gram C per scf = metric tons
from company records, (million (MM) a continuous flow monitor, if one is not
C per MMscf).
standard cubic feet per year, MMscf/ already present.
year). (2) Calculate CH4 and N2O emissions
HHV = Higher heating value for refinery fuel according to the requirements in (2) For catalytic cracking units and
or flare gas from company records § 98.33(c)(2) using the emission factors fluid coking units that do not use a
(British thermal units per scf, Btu/scf = for Refinery Gas in Table C–3 in subpart continuous CO2 CEMS for the final
MMBtu/MMscf). C of this part. exhaust stack, you must continuously
EmF = Default CO2 emission factor of 60 (c) For catalytic cracking units and monitor the O2, CO, and CO2
kilograms CO2/MMBtu (HHV basis). traditional fluid coking units, calculate concentrations in the exhaust stack from
0.001 = Unit conversion factor (metric tons the GHG emissions using the applicable the catalytic cracking unit regenerator or
per kilogram, mt/kg). methods described in paragraphs (c)(1) fluid coking unit burner prior to the
n = Number of start-up, shutdown, and combustion of other fossil fuels and
through (4) of this section.
malfunction events during the reporting calculate the CO2 emissions according
(1) For catalytic cracking units and
year. to the requirements of paragraphs
p = Start-up, shutdown, and malfunction
fluid coking units that use a continuous
CO2 CEMS for the final exhaust stack, (c)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section:
event index.
44 = Molecular weight of CO2 (kg/kg-mole). calculate the combined CO2 emissions (i) Calculate the CO2 emissions from
12 = Atomic weight of C (kg/kg-mole). from each catalytic cracking or fluid each catalytic cracking unit and fluid
FlareSSM = Volume of flare gas combusted coking unit and CO boiler (if present) coking unit using Equation Y–2 of this
during a start-up, shutdown, or using the CEMS according to the Tier 4 section.
n ( %CO + %CO ) 44
CO2 = ∑ ( Qr )n ∗
2 n
∗ ∗ 0.001 (Eq. Y-2)
1 100% MVC
Where: regenerator or fluid coking unit burner 0.001 = Conversion factor (metric ton/kg).
CO2 = Annual CO2 mass emissions (metric (percent by volume—dry basis). n = Number of hours in calendar year.
tons/year). %CO = Hourly average percent CO
Qr = Volumetric flow rate of exhaust gas from
concentration in the exhaust gas stream (ii) Either continuously monitor the
from the fluid catalytic cracking unit volumetric flow rate of exhaust gas from
the fluid catalytic cracking unit regenerator or fluid coking unit burner the fluid catalytic cracking unit
regenerator or fluid coking unit burner (percent by volume—dry basis). When
prior to the combustion of other fossil no auxiliary fuel is burned and a regenerator or fluid coking unit burner
fuels (dry standard cubic feet per hour, continuous CO monitor is not required, prior to the combustion of other fossil
dscfh). assume %CO to be zero. fuels or calculate the volumetric flow
%CO2 = Hourly average percent CO2 44 = Molecular weight of CO2 (kg/kg-mole). rate of this exhaust gas stream using
concentration in the exhaust gas stream MVC = Molar volume conversion factor Equation Y–3 of this section.
from the fluid catalytic cracking unit (849.5 scf/kg-mole).
Qr =
( 79 ∗ Q + (100 − %O ) ∗ Q )
a oxy oxy
(Eq. Y-3)
100 − %CO2 − %CO − %O2
EP10AP09.109</MATH>
Where: Qoxy = Volumetric flow rate of oxygen cracking unit regenerator or fluid coking
Qr = Volumetric flow rate of exhaust gas from enriched air to the fluid catalytic unit burner based on oxygen purity
the fluid catalytic cracking unit cracking unit regenerator or fluid coking specifications of the oxygen supply used
unit burner as determined from control for enrichment (percent by volume—dry
regenerator or fluid coking unit burner
room instrumentation (dscfh). basis).
prior to the combustion of other fossil %O2 = Hourly average percent oxygen %CO2 = Hourly average percent CO2
EP10AP09.108</MATH>
fuels (dscfh). concentration in exhaust gas stream from concentration in the exhaust gas stream
Qa = Volumetric flow rate of air to the fluid the fluid catalytic cracking unit from the fluid catalytic cracking unit
catalytic cracking unit regenerator or regenerator or fluid coking unit burner regenerator or fluid coking unit burner
fluid coking unit burner, as determined (percent by volume—dry basis). (percent by volume—dry basis).
from control room instrumentation %Ooxy = O2 concentration in oxygen enriched %CO = Hourly average percent CO
EP10AP09.107</MATH>
(dscfh). gas stream inlet to the fluid catalytic concentration in the exhaust gas stream
from the fluid catalytic cracking unit (e)(1), (e)(2), (g)(1), or (g)(2) of this fuel gas must be accounted for only
regenerator or fluid coking unit burner section, as applicable (metric tons/year). once. Typically, these emissions will be
(percent by volume—dry basis). When EmF1 = Default CO2 emission factor for accounted for using the methods
no auxiliary fuel is burned and a petroleum coke from Table C–1 of
subpart C of this part (kg CO2/MMBtu).
described in subpart C of this part for
continuous CO monitor is not required,
assume %CO to be zero. EmF2 = Default CH4 emission factor for combustion sources. Alternatively, you
petroleum coke from Table C–3 of may use the methods in paragraph (c) of
(iii) If a CO boiler or other post- subpart C of this part (kg CH4/MMBtu). this section provided that you do not
combustion device is used, calculate the (4) Calculate N2O emissions using otherwise account for the subsequent
GHG emissions from the fuel fired to the Equation Y–5 of this section. combustion of this low value fuel gas.
CO boiler or post-combustion device (e) For catalytic reforming units,
using the methods for stationary calculate the CO2 emissions using either
combustion sources in paragraph (a) of ⎛ EmF1 ⎞
N 2 O = ⎜ CO 2 ∗ ⎟ (Eq. Y-5) the methods described in paragraphs
this section and report this separately ⎝ EmF2 ⎠ (e)(1) or (2) of this section and calculate
for the combustion unit. the CH4 and N2O emissions using the
Where:
(3) Calculate CH4 emissions using Equations Y–4 and Y–5 of this section,
N2O = Annual nitrous oxide emissions from
Equation Y–4 of this section. respectively.
coke burn-off (mt N2O/year).
EmF1 = Default CO2 emission factor for (1) Calculate CO2 emissions from the
⎛ EmF1 ⎞ petroleum coke from Table C–1 of catalytic reforming unit catalyst
CH 4 = ⎜ CO 2 ∗ ⎟ (Eq. Y-4) subpart C of this part (kg CO2/MMBtu). regenerator using the methods in
⎝ EmF2 ⎠ EmF2 = Default N2O emission factor for paragraphs (c)(1) or (2) of this section,
petroleum coke from Table C–3 of or
Where:
subpart C of this part (kg N2O/MMBtu). (2) Calculate CO2 emissions from the
CH4 = Annual methane emissions from coke
burn-off (metric tons CH4/year). (d) For fluid coking units that use the catalytic reforming unit catalyst
CO2 = Emission rate of CO2 from coke burn- flexicoking design, the GHG emissions regenerator using Equation Y–6 of this
off calculated in paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), from the resulting use of the low value section.
n
CO 2 = ∑ ( CBQ ) ∗ CF ∗
44
∗ 0.001 (Eq. Y-6)
1
n 12
Where: provided in paragraph (f)(4) of this gas feed to the sulfur recovery plant,
CO2 = Annual CO2 emissions (metric tons/ section, combustion emissions from the you must use engineering calculations,
year). sulfur recovery plant (e.g., from fuel company records, or similar estimates of
CBQ = Coke burn-off quantity per combustion in the Claus burner or the volumetric sour gas flow.
regeneration cycle (kg coke/cycle). tail gas treatment incinerator) must be
CF = Site-specific fraction carbon content of (2) Carbon content. If you have a
produced coke, use 0.94 if site-specific
reported under subpart C of this part. continuous compositional or carbon
fraction carbon content is unavailable (kg For the purposes of this subpart, the
content monitor on the sour gas feed to
C per kg coke). sour gas stream for which monitoring is
the sulfur recovery plant or if you
44 = Molecular weight of CO2 (kg/kg-mole). required according to paragraphs (f)(1)
monitor these parameters on a routine
12 = Atomic weight of C (kg/kg-mole). through (3) of this section is not
n = Number of regeneration cycles in the basis, you must use the measured
considered a fuel.
calendar year. (1) Flow measurement. If you have a carbon content value. Alternatively, you
0.001 = Conversion factor (mt/kg). continuous flow monitor on the sour gas may develop a site-specific carbon
(f) For on-site sulfur recovery plants, feed to the sulfur recovery plant, you content factor or use the default factor
calculate CO2 process emissions from must use the measured flow rates when of 0.20.
sulfur recovery plants according to the the monitor is operational to calculate (3) Calculate the CO2 emissions from
requirements in paragraphs (f)(1) the sour gas flow rate. If you do not have each sulfur recovery plant using
through (4) of this section. Except as a continuous flow monitor on the sour Equation Y–7 of this section.
44
CO 2 = FSG ∗ ∗ MFC ∗ 0.001 (Eq. Y-7)
EP10AP09.113</MATH>
MVC
Where: (4) As an alternative to the monitoring that discharge via the final exhaust stack
CO2 = Annual CO2 emissions (metric tons/ methods in paragraphs (f)(1) through (3) from the sulfur recovery plant and
EP10AP09.112</MATH>
year). of this section, you may use a calculate the combustion emissions
FSG = Volumetric flow rate of sour gas feed continuous flow monitor and CO2 CEMS from the fuel use according to subpart
to the sulfur recovery plant (scf/year). in the final exhaust stack from the sulfur C of this part. You must report the
44 = Molecular weight of CO2 (kg/kg-mole). recovery plant according to the process emissions from the sulfur
MVC = Molar volume conversion factor
EP10AP09.111</MATH>
requirements in § 98.33(a)(4) to recovery plant as the difference in the

(849.5 scf/kg-mole). calculate the combined process and CO2 CEMS emissions and the calculated
MFC = Mole fraction of carbon in the sour gas combustion emissions for the sulfur combustion emissions associated with
to the sulfur recovery plant (kg-mole C/ recovery plant. You must monitor fuel the sulfur recovery plant final exhaust
kg-mole gas); default = 0.20. use in the Claus burner, tail gas stack.
0.001 = Conversion factor, kg to metric tons.
EP10AP09.110</MATH>
incinerator, or other combustion sources
(g) For coke calcining units, calculate combusted using the CEMS according to (i) Calculate the CO2 emissions for
GHG emissions according to the the requirements in § 98.33(a)(4). any auxiliary fuel fired to the calcining
applicable provisions in paragraphs (2) For coke calcining units that do unit using the applicable methods in
(g)(1) through (3) of this section. not use a continuous CO2 CEMS for the subpart C of this part.
(1) For coke calcining units that use final exhaust stack, calculate CO2
(ii) Calculate the CO2 emissions from
a continuous CO2 CEMS for the final emissions from the coke calcining unit
exhaust stack, calculate the combined according to the requirements in the coke calcining process using
CO2 emissions from the coke calcining paragraphs (g)(2)(i) and (ii) of this Equation Y–8 of this section.
process and any auxiliary fuel section.
44
CO 2 = ∗ ( M in ∗ CCGC − ( M out + M dust ) ∗ CCMPC ) (Eq. Y-8)
12
Where: Mdust = Annual mass of petroleum coke dust calcining unit calculated in paragraphs
CO2 = Annual CO2 emissions (metric tons/ collected in the dust collection system of (g)(1) or (2), as applicable, and calculate
year). the coke calcining unit from facility
CH4 using Equation Y–4 of this section
Min = Annual mass of green coke fed to the records (metric ton petroleum coke dust/
year). and N2O emissions using Equation Y–5
coke calcining unit from facility records of this section.
(metric tons/year). CCMPC = Average mass fraction carbon
CCGC = Average mass fraction carbon content content of marketable petroleum coke (h) For asphalt blowing operations,
produced by the coke calcining unit from
of green coke from facility measurement calculate GHG emissions according to
facility measurement data (metric ton
data (metric ton carbon/metric ton green the applicable provisions in paragraphs
carbon/metric ton petroleum coke).
coke). (h)(1) and (2) of this section.
44 = Molecular weight of CO2 (kg/kg-mole).
Mout = Annual mass of marketable petroleum
12 = Atomic weight of C (kg/kg-mole). (1) For uncontrolled asphalt blowing
coke produced by the coke calcining unit
from facility records (metric tons (3) For all coke calcining units, use operations, calculate CH4 emissions
petroleum coke/year). the CO2 emissions from the coke using Equation Y–9 of this section.
⎛ 16 ⎞
CH 4 = ⎜ QAB ∗ EFAB ∗ ∗ 0.001⎟ (Eq. Y-9)
⎝ MVC ⎠
Where: EFAB = Emission factor for asphalt blowing (2) For controlled asphalt blowing
CH4 = Annual methane emissions from from facility-specific test data (scf CH4/ operations, calculate CO2 emissions
MMbbl); use 2,555,000 scf CH4/MMbbl if using Equation Y–10 of this section,
uncontrolled asphalt blowing (metric
facility-specific test data are unavailable.
tons CH4/year). 16 = Molecular weight of CH4 (kg/kg-mole). provided these emissions are not
QAB = Quantity of asphalt blown (million MVC = Molar volume conversion factor already included in the flare emissions
barrels per year, MMbbl/year). (849.5 scf/kg-mole). calculated in paragraph (b) of this
0.001 = Conversion factor (metric ton/kg). section.
⎛ 44 ⎞
CO 2 = ⎜ QAB ∗ EFAB ∗ ∗ 1 ∗ 0.001⎟ (Eq. Y-10)
⎝ MVC ⎠
Where: MVC = Molar volume conversion factor depressurization of the coking unit
CO2 = Annual CO2 emissions (metric ton/ (849.5 scf/kg-mole). vessel to atmosphere using the process
year). 1 = Assumed conversion efficiency (kg-mole vent method in paragraph (j) of this
QAB = Quantity of asphalt blown (MMbbl/ CO2/kg-mole CH4). section and calculate the CH4 emissions
year). 0.001 = Conversion factor (metric tons/kg).
EP10AP09.117</MATH>
from the subsequent opening of the
EFAB = Default emission factor (2,555,000 scf
CH4/MM bbl). (i) For delayed coking units, calculate vessel for coke cutting operations using
44 = Molecular weight of CO2 (kg/kg-mole). the CH4 emissions from the Equation Y–11 of this section.
EP10AP09.116</MATH>
⎛ π ∗ D2 16 ⎞
CH 4 = ⎜ N ∗ H ∗ ∗ ∗ MFCH 4 ∗ 0.001⎟ (Eq. Y-11)
⎝ 4 MVC ⎠
EP10AP09.115</MATH>
Where: N = Total number of vessel openings for all MVC = Molar volume conversion factor
CH4 = Annual methane emissions from the delayed coking unit vessels of the same (849.5 scf/kg-mole).
delayed coking unit vessel opening dimensions during the year. MFCH4 = Mole fraction of methane in coking
(metric ton/year). H = Height of coking unit vessel (feet). vessel gas (kg-mole CH4/kg-mole gas);
D = Diameter of coking unit vessel (feet). default value is 0.03.
EP10AP09.114</MATH>
16 = Molecular weight of CH4 (kg/kg-mole). 0.001 = Conversion factor (metric ton/kg).
(j) For each process vent not covered the Equation Y–12 of this section. You purge vents when methane is used as
in paragraphs (a) through (i) of this must use Equation Y–12 for catalytic the purge gas.
section, calculate GHG emissions using reforming unit depressurization and
N
MWx
Ex = ∑ VRn ∗ MFx ∗ ∗ VTn ∗ 0.001 (Eq. Y-12)
n =1 MVC
Where: MFx = Mole fraction of GHG x in process 0.001 = Conversion factor (metric ton/kg)
Ex = Annual emissions of each GHG from vent.
MWx = Molecular weight of GHG x (kg/kg-
(k) For uncontrolled blowdown
process vent (metric ton/yr). systems, you must either use the
N = Number of venting events per year. mole); use 44 for CO2 or N2O and 16 for
CH4. methods for process vents in paragraph
VRn = Volumetric flow rate of process vent (j) of this section or calculate CH4
MVC = Molar volume conversion factor
(scf per hour per event). (849.5 scf/kg-mole). emissions using Equation Y–13 of this
44 = Molecular weight of CO2 (kg/kg-mole). VTn = Venting time, (hours per event). section.
⎛ 16 ⎞
CH 4 = ⎜ QRe f ∗ EFBD ∗ ∗ 0.001⎟ (Eq. Y-13)
⎝ MVC ⎠
Where: 16 = Molecular weight of CH4 (kg/kg-mole). (1) Use process-specific methane

CH4 = Methane emission rate from blowdown MVC = Molar volume conversion factor composition data (from measurement
systems (mt CH4/year). (849.5 scf/kg-mole). data or process knowledge) and any of
QRef = Quantity of crude oil plus the quantity 0.001 = Conversion factor (metric ton/kg). the emission estimation procedures
of intermediate products received from
off site that are processed at the facility (l) For equipment leaks, calculate CH4 provided in the Protocol for Equipment
(MMbbl/year). emissions using the method specified in Leak Emissions Estimates (EPA–453/R–
EFBD = Methane emission factor for either paragraph (l)(1) or (l)(2) of this 95–017, NTIS PB96–175401).
uncontrolled blown systems (scf CH4/ (2) Use Equation Y–14 of this section.
MMbbl); default is 137,000. section.
CH 4 = ( 0.4 ∗ N CD + 0.2 ∗ N PU 1 + 0.1 ∗ N PU 2 + 4.3 ∗ N H 2 + 6 ∗ N FGS ) (Eq. Y-14)
Where: (m) For storage tanks, calculate CH4 Where:

CH4 = Annual methane emissions from emissions using the applicable methods CH4 = Annual methane emissions from
fugitive equipment leaks (metric tons/ in paragraphs (m)(1) and (2) of this storage tanks (metric tons/year).
year) section. 0.1 = Default emission factor for storage tanks
NCD = Number of atmospheric crude oil (1) For storage tanks other than those (metric ton CH4/MMbbl).
distillation columns at the facility. processing unstabilized crude oil, you QRef = Quantity of crude oil plus the quantity
NPU1 = Cumulative number of catalytic must either calculate CH4 emissions of intermediate products received from
cracking units, coking units (delayed or from storage tanks that have a vapor- off site that are processed at the facility
fluid), hydrocracking, and full-range phase methane concentration of 0.5 (MMbbl/year).
distillation columns (including volume percent or more using tank-
depropanizer and debutanizer (2) For storage tanks that process
specific methane composition data
EP10AP09.122</MATH>
distillation columns) at the facility. unstabilized crude oil, calculate CH4
NPU2 = Cumulative number of hydrotreating/
(from measurement data or product
knowledge) and the TANKS Model emissions from the storage of
hydrorefining units, catalytic reforming
units, and visbreaking units at the (Version 4.09D) or estimate CH4 unstabilized crude oil using either tank-
facility. emissions from storage tanks using specific methane composition data
NH2 = Total number of hydrogen plants at the Equation Y–15 of this section. (from measurement data or product EP10AP09.121</MATH>
facility. knowledge) and direct measurement of

NFGS = Total number of fuel gas systems at CH 4 = ( 0.1 ∗ QRe f ) (Eq. Y-15) the gas generation rate or by using
the facility. Equation Y–16 of this section.
EP10AP09.120</MATH>
16
CH 4 = ( 995,000 ∗ Qun ∗ ΔP ) ∗ MFCH 4 ∗ ∗ 0.001 (Eq. Y-16)
MVC
EP10AP09.119</MATH>
Where: DP = Pressure differential from the previous mole CH4/kg-mole gas); use 0.27 as a
CH4 = Annual methane emissions from storage pressure to atmospheric pressure default if measurement data are not
storage tanks (metric tons/year). (pounds per square inch, psi). available.
MFCH4 = Mole fraction of CH4 in vent gas 995,000 = Correlation Equation factor (scf gas
Qun = Quantity of unstabilized crude oil
from the unstabilized crude oil storage per MMbbl per psi)
received at the facility (MMbbl/year).
EP10AP09.118</MATH>
tank from facility measurements (kg- 16 = Molecular weight of CH4 (kg/kg-mole).
MVC = Molar volume conversion factor substitute data value for the missing coking unit, catalytic reforming unit,
(849.5 scf/kg-mole). parameter shall be used in the sulfur recovery plant, or coke calcining
0.001 = Conversion factor (metric ton/kg). calculations. unit).
(n) For crude oil, intermediate, or (a) For each missing value of the heat (3) Maximum rated throughput of the
product loading operations for which content, carbon content, or molecular unit, in bbl/stream day, metric tons
the equilibrium vapor-phase weight of the fuel, the substitute data sulfur produced/stream day, or metric
concentration of methane is 0.5 volume value shall be the arithmetic average of tons coke calcined/stream day, as
percent or more, calculate CH4 the quality-assured values of that applicable.
emissions from loading operations using parameter immediately preceding and (4) The calculated CO2, CH4, and N2O
product-specific, vapor-phase methane immediately following the missing data annual emissions for each unit,
composition data (from measurement incident. If, for a particular parameter, expressed in metric tons of each
data or process knowledge) and the no quality-assured data are available pollutant emitted.
emission estimation procedures prior to the missing data incident, the (5) A description of the method used
provided in Section 5.2 of the AP–42: substitute data value shall be the first to calculate the CO2 emissions for each
‘‘Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission quality-assured value obtained after the unit (e.g., reference section and
Factors, Volume 1: Stationary Point and missing data period. Equation number).
Area Sources’’. For loading operations (b) For missing oil and gas flow rates, (g) For fluid coking unit of the
in which the equilibrium vapor-phase use the standard missing data flexicoking type, the owner or operator
concentration of methane is less than procedures in section 2.4.2 of appendix shall report:
0.5 volume percent, report zero methane D to part 75 of this chapter. (1) The unit ID number (if applicable).
emissions. (c) For missing CO2, CO, or O2, CH4, (2) A description of the type of unit.
and N2O concentrations, stack gas flow (3) Maximum rated throughput of the
§ 98.254 Monitoring and QA/QC rate, and stack gas moisture content unit, in bbl/stream day.
requirements. values, use the applicable initial (4) Indicate whether the GHG
(a) All fuel flow meters, gas missing data procedures in § 98.35 of emissions from the low heat value gas
composition monitors, and heating subpart C of this part. are accounted for in subpart C of this
value monitors that are used to provide (d) For hydrogen plants, use the part or § 98.253(c).
data for the GHG emissions calculations missing data procedures in subpart P of (5) If the GHG emissions for the low
shall be calibrated prior to the first this part. heat value gas are calculated at the
reporting year, using a suitable method (e) For petrochemical production flexicoking unit, also report the
published by a consensus standards units, use the missing data procedures calculated annual CO2, CH4, and N2O
organization (e.g., ASTM, ASME, API, in subpart X of this part. emissions for each unit, expressed in
AGA, etc.). Alternatively, calibration (f) For on-site landfills, use the metric tons of each pollutant emitted.
procedures specified by the flow meter missing data procedures in subpart HH (h) For asphalt blowing operations,
manufacturer may be used. Fuel flow of this part. the owner or operator shall report:
meters, gas composition monitors, and (g) For on-site wastewater treatment (1) The unit ID number (if applicable).
heating value monitors shall be systems, use the missing data (2) The quantity of asphalt blown.
recalibrated either annually or at the procedures in subpart II of this part. (3) The type of control device used to
minimum frequency specified by the reduce methane (and other organic)
manufacturer. § 98.256 Data reporting requirements. emissions from the unit.
(b) The owner or operator shall In addition to the reporting (4) The calculated annual CO2, CH4,
document the procedures used to ensure requirements of § 98.3(c), you must and N2O emissions for each unit,
the accuracy of the estimates of fuel report the information specified in expressed in metric tons of each
usage, gas composition, and heating paragraphs (a) through (e) of this pollutant emitted.
value including but not limited to section. (i) For process vents subject to
calibration of weighing equipment, fuel (a) For combustion sources, including § 98.253(j), the owner or operator shall
flow meters, and other measurement flares, use the data reporting report:
devices. The estimated accuracy of requirements in § 98.36. (1) The vent ID number (if applicable).
measurements made with these devices (b) For hydrogen plants, use the data (2) The unit or operation associated
shall also be recorded, and the technical reporting requirements in subpart P of with the emissions.
basis for these estimates shall be this part. (3) The type of control device used to
provided. (c) For petrochemical production reduce methane (and other organic)
(c) All CO2 CEMS and flow rate units, use the data reporting emissions from the unit, if applicable.
monitors used for direct measurement of requirements in subpart X of this part. (4) The calculated annual CO2, CH4,
GHG emissions must comply with the (d) For on-site landfills, use the data and N2O emissions for each unit,
QA procedures in § 98.34(e). reporting requirements in subpart HH of expressed in metric tons of each
this part. pollutant emitted.
§ 98.255 Procedures for estimating (e) For on-site wastewater treatment (j) For equipment leaks, storage tanks,
missing data. systems, use the data reporting uncontrolled blowdown systems,
A complete record of all measured requirements in subpart II of this part. delayed coking units, and loading
parameters used in the GHG emissions (f) For catalytic cracking units, operations, the owner or operator shall
calculations is required (e.g., traditional fluid coking units, catalytic report:
concentrations, flow rates, fuel heating reforming units, sulfur recovery plants, (1) The total quantity (in Million bbl)
values, carbon content values). and coke calcining units, owners and of crude oil plus the quantity of
Therefore, whenever a quality-assured operators shall report: intermediate products received from off-
value of a required parameter is (1) The unit ID number (if applicable). site that are processed at the facility in
unavailable (e.g., if a CEMS (2) A description of the type of unit the reporting year.
malfunctions during unit operation or if (fluid catalytic cracking unit, thermal (2) The method used to calculate
a required fuel sample is not taken), a catalytic cracking unit, traditional fluid equipment leak emissions and the
calculated, cumulative CH4 emissions (9) The cumulative annual CH4 that manufactures phosphoric acid by
(in metric tons of each pollutant emissions (in metric tons of each reacting phosphate rock and acid.
emitted) for all equipment leak sources. pollutant emitted) for loading
(3) The cumulative annual CH4 operations. § 98.261 Reporting threshold.
emissions (in metric tons of each (k) If you have a CEMS that measures You must report GHG emissions
pollutant emitted) for all storage tanks, CO2 emissions but that is not required under this subpart if your facility
except for those used to process to be used for reporting GHG emissions contains a phosphoric acid production
unstabilized crude oil. under this subpart (i.e., a CO2 CEMS on process and the facility meets the
(4) The quantity of unstabilized crude a process heater stack but the requirements of either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2).
oil received during the calendar year combustion emissions are calculated
and the cumulative CH4 emissions (in § 98.262 GHGs to report.
based on the fuel gas consumption), you
metric tons of each pollutant emitted) must identify the emission source that (a) You must report CO2 process
for storage tanks used to process has the CEMS and report the CO2 emissions from each wet-process
unstabilized crude oil. emissions as measured by the CEMS for phosphoric acid production line.
(5) The cumulative annual CH4 that emissions source. (b) You must report CO2, N2O, and
emissions (in metric tons of each
CH4 emissions from each stationary
pollutant emitted) for uncontrolled § 98.257 Records that must be retained.
combustion unit. You must follow the
blowdown systems. In addition to the records required by
(6) The total number of delayed calculation methods and all other
§ 98.3(g), you must retain the records of requirements of subpart C of this part.
coking units at the facility, the number all parameters monitored under
of delayed coking drums per unit, the § 98.255. § 98.263 Calculating GHG emissions.
dimensions and annual number of coke-
cutting cycles for each drum, and the § 98.258 Definitions. (a) If you operate and maintain a
cumulative annual CH4 emissions (in CEMS that measures total CO2
All terms used in this subpart have emissions consistent with the
metric tons of each pollutant emitted) the same meaning given in the Clean Air
for delayed coking units. requirements in subpart C of this part,
Act and subpart A of this part. you must estimate total CO2 emissions
(7) The quantity and types of
materials loaded that have an Subpart Z—Phosphoric Acid according to the requirements in
equilibrium vapor-phase concentration Production § § 98.33(a) and 98.35.
of methane of 0.5 volume percent or (b) If you do not operate and maintain
greater, and the type of vessels in which § 98.260 Definition of the source category. a CEMS that measures total CO2
the material is loaded. The phosphoric acid production emissions consistent with the
(8) The type of control system used to source category consists of facilities requirements in subpart C of this part,
reduce emissions from the loading of with a wet-process phosphoric acid you must calculate process emissions of
material with an equilibrium vapor- process line used to produce phosphoric CO2 from each wet-process phosphoric
phase concentration of methane of 0.5 acid. A wet-process phosphoric acid acid process line using Equation Z–1 of
volume percent or greater, if any. process line is any system of operation this section:
z
44 2000
Em = ∑ ∗ [ ICn ∗ Pn ] ∗ (Eq. Z-1)
n =1 12 2205
Where: Where: (c) Record the mass of phosphate rock

Em = Annual CO2 mass emissions from a wet- CO2 = Annual process CO2 emissions from consumed each month in each wet-
process phosphoric acid process line m phosphoric acid production process phosphoric acid process line.
(metric tons). facility(metric tons/year)
44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to § 98.265 Procedures for estimating
Em = Annual process CO2 emissions from
carbon. missing data.
wet-process phosphoric acid process line
ICn = Inorganic carbon content of the batch There are no missing data procedures
of phosphate rock used during month n, m (metric tons/year)
p = Number of wet-process phosphoric acid for wet-process phosphoric acid
from the carbon analysis results (percent
process lines. production facilities estimated
by weight, expressed as a decimal
fraction). according to § 98.263(b). A complete
Pn = Mass of phosphate rock consumed in § 98.264 Monitoring and QA/QC record of all measured parameters used
month n by wet-process phosphoric acid requirements. in the GHG emissions calculations is
process line m (tons). (a) Determine the inorganic carbon required. A re-test must be performed if
m = Each wet-process phosphoric acid
content of each batch of phosphate rock the data from the measurement are
process line. determined to be unacceptable.
z = Number of months during which the consumed in the production of
process line m operates. phosphoric acid using the applicable § 98.266 Data reporting requirements.
2000/2205 = Conversion factor to convert test method in section IX of the ‘‘Book In addition to the information
tons to metric tons. of Methods Used and Adopted by the required by § 98.3(c), each annual report
(c) You must determine the total Association of Florida Phosphate must contain the information specified
Chemists’’, Seventh Edition, 1991.
EP10AP09.124</MATH>
emissions from the facility using in paragraphs (a) through (e) of this
Equation Z–2 of this section: (b) If more than one batch of section for each wet-process phosphoric
phosphate rock is consumed in a month, acid production line:
p use the highest inorganic carbon content (a) Annual phosphoric acid
CO2 = ∑ Em (Eq. Z-2) measured during that month in production by origin of the phosphate
EP10AP09.123</MATH>
m =1 Equation Z–1 of this subpart. rock (metric tons).
(b) Annual phosphoric acid paper (i.e., integrated facilities), produce must follow the calculation procedures,
production by concentration of paper products from purchased pulp, monitoring and QA/QC methods,
phosphoric acid produced (metric tons). produce secondary fiber from recycled missing data procedures, reporting
(c) Annual phosphoric acid paper, convert paper into paperboard requirements, and recordkeeping
production capacity. products (e.g., containers), and operate requirements of subpart C of this part.
(d) Annual arithmetic average percent coating and laminating processes. (g) Emissions of CH4 from on-site
inorganic carbon in phosphate rock (b) The emission units for which GHG landfills. You must follow the
from batch records. emissions must be reported are listed in calculation procedures, monitoring and
(e) Annual average phosphate rock paragraphs (b)(1) through (6) of this QA/QC methods, missing data
consumption from monthly section: procedures, reporting requirements, and
measurement records (in metric tons). (1) Chemical recovery furnaces at recordkeeping requirements of subpart
kraft and sodamills (including recovery HH of this part.
§ 98.267 Records that must be retained. furnaces that burn spent pulping liquor
In addition to the records required by (h) Emissions of CH4 from on-site
produced by both the kraft and
§ 98.3(g), you must retain the records wastewater treatment. You must follow
semichemical process).
specified in paragraphs (a) through (h) the calculation procedures, monitoring
(2) Chemical recovery combustion
of this section for each wet-process and QA/QC methods, missing data
units at sulfite facilities.
phosphoric acid production facility: (3) Chemical recovery combustion procedures, reporting requirements, and
(a) Total annual CO2 emissions from units at stand-alone semichemical recordkeeping requirements of subpart
all wet-process phosphoric acid process facilities. II of this part.
lines (in metric tons). (4) Pulp mill lime kilns at kraft and § 98.273 Calculating GHG emissions.
(b) Phosphoric acid production (by soda facilities.
origin of the phosphate rock) and (5) Systems for adding makeup (a) For each chemical recovery
concentration. chemicals (CaCO3, Na2CO3). furnace located at a kraft or soda
(c) Phosphoric acid production facility, you must determine CO2,
capacity (in metric tons/year). § 98.271 Reporting threshold. biogenic CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions
(d) Number of wet-process phosphoric You must report GHG emissions using the procedures in paragraphs
acid process lines. under this subpart if your facility (a)(1) through (3) of this section. CH4
(e) Monthly phosphate rock contains a pulp and paper and N2O emissions must be calculated
consumption (by origin of phosphate manufacturing process and the facility as the sum of emissions from
rock). meets the requirements of either combustion of fossil fuels and
(f) Measurements of percent inorganic § 98.2(a)(1) or (2). combustion of biomass in spent liquor
carbon in phosphate rock for each batch solids.
§ 98.272 GHGs to report.
consumed for phosphoric acid (1) Calculate fossil fuel-based CO2
production. You must report the emissions listed emissions from direct measurement of
(g) Records of all phosphate rock in paragraphs (a) through (h) of this fossil fuels consumed and default
purchases and/or deliveries (if vertically section: emissions factors according to the Tier
integrated with a mine). (a) CO2, biogenic CO2, CH4, and N2O 1 methodology for stationary
(h) Documentation of the procedures emissions from each kraft or soda combustion sources in § 98.33(a)(1).
used to ensure the accuracy of monthly chemical recovery furnace.
(b) CO2, biogenic CO2, CH4, and N2O (2) Calculate fossil fuel-based CH4 and
phosphate rock consumption. N2O emissions from direct measurement
emissions from each sulfite chemical
§ 98.268 Definitions. recovery combustion unit. of fossil fuels consumed, default HHV,
(c) CO2, biogenic CO2, CH4, and N2O and default emissions factors and
All terms used in this subpart have convert to metric tons of CO2 equivalent
the same meaning given in the Clean Air emissions from each semichemical
chemical recovery combustion unit. according to the methodology for
Act and subpart A of this part. stationary combustion sources in
(d) CO2, biogenic CO2, CH4, and N2O
Subpart AA—Pulp and Paper emissions from each kraft or soda pulp § 98.33(c)(2) and (3).
Manufacturing mill lime kiln. (3) Calculate biogenic CO2, CH4, and
(e) CO2 emissions from addition of N2O emissions from biomass using
§ 98.270 Definition of source category. makeup chemicals (CaCO3, Na2CO3). measured quantities of spent liquor
(a) The pulp and paper manufacturing (f) Emissions of CO2, N2O, and CH4 solids fired, site-specific HHV, and
source category consists of facilities that from any other on-site stationary fuel default or site-specific emissions factors,
produce market pulp (i.e., stand-alone combustion units (boilers, gas turbines, according to Equation AA–1 of this
pulp facilities), manufacture pulp and thermal oxiders, and other sources). You section:
12
( )
CO 2 , CH 4 , or N 2 O from biomass = ∑ 1 x 10−3 (907) ( Solids) p ∗ ( HHV ) p ∗ EF (Eq. AA-1)
p =1
Where: (HHV)p = High heat value of the spent liquor 907 = Conversion factor from tons to
CH4, or N2O, from Biomass = Biogenic CO2, solids for month p (mmBtu per mass). kilograms.
CH4, or N2O mass emissions from spent EF = Default emission factor for CO2, CH4, or
liquor solids combustion (metric tons). N2O, from Table AA–1 of this subpart (kg (b) For each chemical recovery
(Solids)p = Mass of spent liquor solids CO2, CH4, or N2O per mmBtu). combustion unit located at a sulfite or
combusted per month p (short tons per 1 × 10¥3 = Conversion factor from kilograms stand-alone semichemical facility, you
month). to metric tons. must determine CO2, CH4, and N2O
EP10AP09.125</MATH>
emissions using the procedures in
paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this for stationary combustion sources in methodology for stationary combustion
section: § 98.33(a)(1). sources in § 98.33(c)(2).
(1) Calculate fossil CO2 emissions (2) Calculate CH4 and N2O emissions (3) Calculate biogenic CO2 emissions
from fossil fuels from direct from fossil fuels from direct using measured quantities of spent
measurement of fossil fuels consumed measurement of fossil fuels consumed, liquor solids fired and the carbon
default HHV, and default emissions content of the spent liquor solids,
and default emissions factors according
factors and convert to metric tons of CO2 according to Equation AA–2 of this
to the Tier 1 Calculation Methodology
equivalent according to the section:
12
44
Biogenic CO 2 = ∑ ∗ (Solids) p ∗ (CC) p (Eq. AA-2)
p =1 12
Where: methodology for stationary combustion default HHV, and default emissions
Biogenic CO2 = Annual CO2 mass emissions sources in § 98.2(b)(4). factors and convert to metric tons of CO2
for spent liquor solids combustion (c) For each pulp mill lime kiln equivalent according to the
(metric tons). located at a kraft or soda facility, you methodology for stationary combustion
(Solids)p = Mass of the spent liquor solids must determine CO2, CH4, and N2O sources in § 98.33(c)(2) and (3); use the
combusted in month p (metric tons per emissions using the procedures in default HHV listed in Table C–1 of
month). paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of this subpart C of this part and the default
(CC)p = Carbon content of the spent liquor section: CH4 and N2O emissions factors listed in
solids, from the fuel analysis results for (1) Calculate CO2 emissions from Table AA–2 of this subpart.
the month p (percent by weight,
fossil fuel from direct measurement of (3) Biogenic CO2 emissions from
expressed as a decimal fraction, e.g.,
95% = 0.95).
fossil fuels consumed and default HHV conversion of CaCO3 to CaO are
44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to and default emissions factors, according calculated as part of the chemical
carbon. to the Tier 1 Calculation Methodology recovery furnace biogenic CO2 estimates
for stationary combustion sources in in paragraph (a)(3) of this section.
(4) Calculate CH4 and N2O emissions § 98.33(a)(1); use the default HHV listed (d) For makeup chemical use, you
from biomass using Equation AA–1 and in Table C–1 of subpart C of this part must calculate CO2 emissions by using
the default CH4 and N2O emissions and the default CO2 emissions factors direct or indirect measurement of the
factors for kraft facilities in Table AA– listed in Table AA–2 of this subpart. quantity of chemicals added and ratios
1 of this subpart and convert the CH4 or (2) Calculate CH4 and N2O emissions of the molecular weights of CO2 and the
N2O emissions to metric tons of CO2 from fossil fuel from direct makeup chemicals, according to
equivalent according to the measurement of fossil fuels consumed, Equation AA–3 of this section:
⎡ 44 44 ⎤
CO 2 = ⎢ M (CaCO 3 ) ∗ + M ( Na2CO 3 ) ∗1000 kg/metric ton (Eq. AA-3)
⎣ 100 105.99 ⎥⎦
Where: determined once per month using § 98.275 Procedures for estimating
CO2 = CO2 mass emissions from makeup ASTM method D5373–08. missing data.
chemicals (kilograms/yr). (c) Each facility must keep records A complete record of all measured
M (caCO3) = Make-up quantity of CaCO3 used parameters used in the GHG emissions
that include a detailed explanation of
for the reporting year (metric tons).
how company records of measurements calculations is required. Therefore,
M (NaCO3) = Make-up quantity of Na2CO3
are used to estimate GHG emissions. whenever a quality-assured value of a
used for the reporting year (metric tons).
44 = Molecular weight of CO2. The owner or operator must also required parameter is unavailable (e.g.,
180 = Molecular weight of CaCO3. document the procedures used to ensure if a meter malfunctions during unit
105.99 = Molecular weight of Na2CO3. the accuracy of the measurements of operation or if a required sample is not
fuel and makeup chemical usage, taken), a substitute data value for the
§ 98.274 Monitoring and QA/QC including, but not limited, to calibration missing parameter shall be used in the
requirements. calculations, according to the
of weighing equipment, fuel flow
(a) Each facility subject to this subpart meters, and other measurement devices. requirements of paragraphs (a) through
must quality assure the GHG emissions The estimated accuracy of (c) of this section:
data according to the applicable measurements made with these devices (a) There are no missing data
requirements in § 98.34. All QA/QC data must be recorded and the technical procedures for measurements of heat
must be available for inspection upon basis for these estimates must be content and carbon content of spent
request. provided. The procedures used to pulping liquor. A re-test must be
(b) High heat values of black liquor convert spent liquor flow rates to units performed if the data from any monthly
measurements are determined to be
EP10AP09.127</MATH>
must be determined once per month of mass (i.e., spent liquor solids firing
using TAPPI Method T 684. The mass rates) also must be documented. invalid.
of spent black liquor solids must be (d) Records must be made available (b) For missing spent pulping liquor
determined once per month using upon request for verification of the flow rates, use the lesser value of either
TAPPI Method T 650. Carbon analyses calculations and measurements. the maximum fuel flow rate for the
EP10AP09.126</MATH>
for spent pulping liquor must be combustion unit, or the maximum flow
rate that the fuel flow meter can (b) Total consumption of all biomass (c) Monthly analyses of spent pulping
measure. fuels by calendar quarter. liquor HHV for each chemical recovery
(c) For the use of makeup chemicals (c) Total annual quantity of spent furnace at kraft and soda facilities.
(carbonates), the substitute data value liquor solids fired at the facility by (d) Monthly analyses of spent pulping
shall be the best available estimate of calendar quarter. liquor carbon content for each chemical
makeup chemical consumption, based (d) Total annual steam purchases. recovery combustion unit at a sulfite or
on available data (e.g., past accounting semichemical pulp facility.
(e) Total annual quantities of makeup
records, production rates). The owner or (e) Monthly quantities of spent liquor
chemicals (carbonates) used.
operator shall document and keep solids fired in each chemical recovery
records of the procedures used for all § 98.277 Records that must be retained. furnace and chemical recovery
such estimates. combustion unit.
(f) Monthly and annual steam
required by § 98.3(g), you must retain
§ 98.276 Data reporting requirements. purchases.
the records in paragraphs (a) through (h)
(g) Monthly and annual steam
In addition to the information of this section.
production for each biomass
required by § 98.3(c), each annual report (a) GHG emission estimates (including combustion unit.
must contain the information in separate estimates of biogenic CO2) by (h) Monthly quantities of makeup
paragraphs (a) through (e) of this section calendar quarter for each emissions chemicals used.
for each GHG emission unit listed in source listed under § 98.270(b) of this
§ 98.270(b). subpart. § 98.278 Definitions.
(a) Annual emissions of CO2, biogenic (b) Monthly total consumption of all All terms used in this subpart have
CO2, CH4, and N2O presented by biomass fuels for each biomass the same meaning given in the Clean Air
calendar quarter. combustion unit. Act and subpart A of this part.
TABLE AA–1 OF SUBPART AA—KRAFT PULPING LIQUOR EMISSIONS FACTORS FOR BIOMASS-BASED CO2, CH4, AND N2O
Biomass-based emissions factors
(kg/mmBtu HHV)
Wood furnish
CO2a CH4 N2O
North American Softwood .................................................................................................................................... 94.4 0.030 0.005

North American Hardwood .................................................................................................................................. 93.7
Bagasse ............................................................................................................................................................... 95.5
Bamboo ................................................................................................................................................................ 93.7
Straw .................................................................................................................................................................... 95.1
a Includes emissions from both the recovery furnace and pulp mill lime kiln.
TABLE AA–2 OF SUBPART AA—KRAFT LIME KILN AND CALCINER EMISSIONS FACTORS FOR FOSSIL FUEL-BASED CO2,
CH4, AND N2O
Fossil fuel-based emissions factors (kg/mmBtu HHV)
Fuel Kraft Lime Kilns Kraft Calciners
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2 CH4 N2O
Residual Oil .............................................................................................. 76.7 0.0027 0 76.7 0.0027 0.0003

Distillate Oil .............................................................................................. 73.5 ................ ................ 73.5 ................ 0.0004
Natural Gas .............................................................................................. 56.0 ................ ................ 56.0 ................ 0.0001
Biogas ...................................................................................................... 0 ................ ................ 0 ................ 0.0001
Subpart BB—Silicon Carbide carbide process units combined, as set for the Tier 4 Calculation Methodology
Production forth in this subpart. in § 98.33(a)(4).
(b) You must report CO2, N2O, and (b) If you do not operate and maintain
§ 98.280 Definition of the source category. CH4 emissions from each stationary a CEMS that measures total CO2
Silicon carbide production includes combustion unit by following all of the emissions consistent with the
any process that produces silicon requirements of subpart C of this part. requirements in subpart C of this part,
carbide for abrasive purposes. you must calculate the annual process
§ 98.281 Reporting threshold. You must determine CO2 emissions in CO2 emissions from all silicon carbide
accordance with the procedures production processes at the facility
specified in either paragraph (a) or (b) combined, using a facility-specific
of this section. emission factor according to the
contains a silicon carbide production
(a) If you operate and maintain a procedures in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2)
CEMS that measures total CO2 of this section.
requirements of either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2).
emissions consistent with the (1) Use Equation BB–1 of this section
§ 98.282 GHGs to report. requirements of § 98.33(b)(5)(iii)(A), (B), to calculate the facility-specific
(a) You must report CO2 and CH4 and (C), you must estimate total CO2 emissions factor for determining CO2
process emissions from all silicon emissions according to the requirements emissions. The carbon content must be
determined quarterly and used to calculate a quarterly CO2 emisssions

factor:
⎛ 44 ⎞
EFCO2 = 0.65 ∗ CCF ∗ ⎜ ⎟ (Eq. BB-1)
⎝ 12 ⎠
Where: (assuming 35 percent of carbon input is 44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to
EFCO2 = CO2 emissions factor (metric tons in the carbide product). carbon.
CO2/metric ton of petroleum coke CCF = Carbon content factor of petroleum (2) Use Equation BB–2 of this section
consumed). coke from the supplier or as measured by to calculate CO2 process emissions
0.65 = Adjustment factor for the amount of the applicable method incorporated by (quarterly) from all silicone carbide
carbon in silicon carbide product reference in § 98.7. production:
q
2000
CO 2 = ∑ ⎡⎣Tn ∗ EFCO 2, n ⎤⎦ ∗ (Eq. BB-2)
n =1 2205
Where: EFCO2, n = CO2 emissions factor from calendar (c) You must determine annual
CO2 = Annual CO2 mass production quarter n (calculated in Equation BB–1 of process CH4 emissions from all silicon
this section).
emissions (metric tons CO2/year). carbide production processes combined
2000/2205 = Conversion factor to convert
Tn = Petroleum coke consumption in tons to metric tons. using Equation BB–3 of this section:
calendar quarter n (tons coke). q = Number of quarters.
q
2000
CH 4 = ∑ [Tn ∗ 10.2] ∗ ∗ 0.001 (Eq. BB-3)
n =1 2205
Where: unacceptable or not representative of § 98.288 Definitions.

CH4 = Annual CH4 mass emissions (metric typical operations. All terms used in this subpart have
tons CH4, year). the same meaning given in the Clean Air
Tn = Petroleum coke consumption in § 98.286 Data reporting requirements.
calendar quarter n (tons coke). Act and subpart A of this part.
10.2 = CH4 emissions factor (kg CH4/metric
ton coke). required by § 98.3(c), each annual report Subpart CC—Soda Ash Manufacturing
2000/2205 = Conversion factor to convert must contain the information specified
in paragraphs (a) through (e) of this § 98.290 Definition of the source category.
tons to metric tons.
0.001 = Conversion factor from kilograms to section. A soda ash manufacturing facility is
metric tons. (a) Annual CO2 and CH4 emissions any facility with a manufacturing line
q = Number of quarters. that calcines trona to produce soda ash.
from all silicon carbide production
§ 98.284 Monitoring and QA/QC processes combined (in metric tons). § 98.291 Reporting threshold.
requirements. (b) Annual production of silicon You must report GHG emissions
(a) You must determine the quantity carbide (in metric tons). under this subpart if your facility
of petroleum coke consumed each (c) Annual capacity of silicon carbide contains a soda ash manufacturing
quarter (tons coke/quarter). production (in metric tons).
(b) For CO2 process emissions, you process and the facility meets the
must determine the carbon content of (d) Annual operating hours. requirements of either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2).
the petroleum coke for four calendar (e) Quarterly facility-specific emission § 98.292 GHGs to report.
quarters per year based on reports from factors.
(a) You must report CO2 process
the supplier or by measurement of the
§ 98.287 Records that must be retained. emissions from each soda ash
carbon content by an off-site laboratory
In addition to the records required by manufacturing line as required in this
using the applicable test method
§ 98.3(g), you must retain the records subpart.
incorporated by reference in § 98.7.
EP10AP09.130</MATH>
specified in paragraphs (a) through (c) of (b) You must report the CO2, N2O, and
§ 98.285 Procedures for estimating this section for all silicon carbide CH4 emissions from fuel combustion at
missing data. production processes combined. each kiln and from each stationary
A complete record of all measured combustion unit by following the
(a) Annual consumption of petroleum
parameters used in the GHG emissions requirements of subpart C of this part.
coke (in metric tons).
EP10AP09.129</MATH>
calculations is required. There are no

missing value provisions for the carbon (b) Quarterly analyses of carbon § 98.293 Calculating GHG emissions.
content factor or coke consumption. A content for consumed coke (averaged to You must determine CO2 emissions in
re-test must be performed if the data an annual basis). accordance with the procedures
from the quarterly carbon content (c) Quarterly facility-specific emission specified in either paragraph (a) or (b)
EP10AP09.128</MATH>
measurements are determined to be factor calculations. of this section.
(a) Any soda ash manufacturing line determine the total process emissions Ek = Annual CO2 process emissions from
that meets the conditions specified in from the facility using Equation CC–1 of each calciner (kiln), k (in metric tons/
§ 98.33(b)(5)(iii)(A),(B), and (C), or this section: year), using either Equation CC–2 or CC–
§ 98.33(b)(5)(ii)(A) through (F) shall 3.
calculate total CO2 emissions using a n n = Number of calciners (kilns) located at the
continuous emissions monitoring CO 2 = ∑ E k (Eq. CC-1) facility.
system according to the Tier 4 k =1
Calculation Methodology specified in Where: (c) Calculate the annual CO2 process
§ 98.33(a)(4). CO2 = Annual process CO2 emissions from
emissions from each kiln using either
(b) If the facility does not measure soda ash manufacturing facility (metric Equation CC–2 or CC–3 of this section.
total emissions with a CEMS, you must tons/year).
12
44 2000 0.097
CO 2 = ∑ ⎡⎣( ICT )n ( Tt )n ⎤⎦ (Eq. CC-2)
n =1 12 2205 1
12
44 2000 0.138
CO 2 = ∑ ⎡( ICsa )n ( Tsa )n ⎤⎦ (Eq. CC-3)
n =1 12 ⎣ 2205 1
Where: monthly basis using either belt scales or § 98.297 Records that must be retained.
CO2 = Annual CO2 process emissions (metric by weighing the soda ash at the truck or In addition to the records required by
tons). rail loadout points of your facility. § 98.3(g), you must retain the records
44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to specified in paragraphs (a) through (d)
(e) You must keep a record of all trona
carbon.
(ICT)n = Inorganic carbon content in trona consumed and soda ash production. of this section for each soda ash
input, from the carbon analysis results You also must document the procedures manufacturing line.
for month n (percent by weight, used to ensure the accuracy of the (a) Monthly production of soda ash
expressed as a decimal fraction). monthly measurements of trona (metric tons).
(ICsa)n = Inorganic carbon content in soda ash consumed soda ash production. (b) Monthly consumption of trona
output, from the carbon analysis results (metric tons).
for month n (percent by weight, § 98.295 Procedures for estimating (c) Daily analyses for inorganic carbon
expressed as a decimal fraction). missing data. content of trona or soda ash (as
(Tt)n = Mass of trona input in month n (tons).
(Tsa)n = Mass of soda ash output in month n A complete record of all measured fractional purity), depending on the
(tons). parameters used in the GHG emissions components used in Equation CC–2 or
2000/2205 = Conversion factor to convert calculations is required. There are no CC–3 of this subpart.
tons to metric tons. missing value provisions for the carbon (d) Number of operating hours in
0.097/1 = Ratio of ton of CO2 emitted for each content of trona or soda ash. A re-test calendar year.
ton of trona. must be performed if the data from the
0.138/1 = Ratio of ton of CO2 emitted for each § 98.298 Definitions.
daily carbon content measurements are
ton of natural soda ash produced. All terms used in this subpart have
determined to be unacceptable.
the same meaning given in the Clean Air
§ 98.296 Data reporting requirements. Act and subpart A of this part.
requirements.
(a) You must determine the inorganic In addition to the information
required by § 98.3(c), each annual report Subpart DD—Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6)
carbon content of the trona or soda ash From Electrical Equipment
on a daily basis and determine the must contain the information specified
monthly average value for each soda ash in paragraphs (a) through (f) of this § 98.300 Definition of the source category.
manufacturing line. section for each soda ash manufacturing The electric power system source
(b) If you calculate CO2 process line. category includes electric power
emissions based on trona input, you (a) Annual CO2 process emissions transmission and distribution systems
must determine the inorganic carbon (metric tons). that operate gas-insulated substations,
content of the trona using a total organic (b) Number of soda ash manufacturing circuit breakers, other switchgear, gas-
carbon analyzer according to the lines. insulated lines, or power transformers
ultraviolet light/chemical (sodium (c) Annual soda ash production containing sulfur-hexafluoride (SF6) or
persulfate) oxidation method (utilizing (metric tons) and annual soda ash perfluorocarbons (PFCs).
ASTM D4839–03). production capacity.
EP10AP09.133</MATH>
(c) If you calculate CO2 process § 98.301 Reporting threshold.

emissions based on soda ash (d) Annual consumption of trona from
You must report GHG emissions from
production, you must determine the monthly measurements (metric tons).
electric power systems if the total
inorganic carbon content of the soda ash (e) Fractional purity (i.e., inorganic nameplate capacity of SF6 and PFC
using ASTM E359–00 (2005). The carbon content) of trona or soda ash (by containing equipment in the system
daily measurements and by monthly
EP10AP09.132</MATH>
inorganic carbon content of soda ash exceeds 17,820 lbs (7,838 kg).
can be directly expressed as the total average) depending on the components
alkalinity of the soda ash. used in Equation CC–2 or CC–3 of this § 98.302 GHGs to report.
(d) You must measure the mass of subpart). You must report total SF6 and PFC
trona input or soda ash produced by (f) Number of operating hours in emissions (including emissions from
EP10AP09.131</MATH>
each soda ash manufacturing line on a calendar year. fugitive equipment leaks, installation,
servicing, equipment decommissioning (c) Switchgear. § 98.303 Calculating GHG emissions.

and disposal, and from storage (d) Gas-insulated lines. (a) For each electric power system,
cylinders) from the following types of you must estimate the annual SF6 and
equipment: (d) Electrical transformers.
PFC emissions using the mass-balance
(a) Gas-insulated substations. approach in Equation DD–1 of this
(b) Circuit breakers. section:
User Emissions = ( Decrease in SF6 Inventory ) + ( Acquisitions of SF6 )

− ( Disbursements of SF6 ) − ( Net Increase in Total Nameplate (Eq. DD-1)
Capacity of Equipment Operated)
Where: (b) Ensure the following QA/QC replacement, and maintenance

Decrease in SF6 Inventory = (SF6 stored in methods are employed throughout the operations.
containers, but not in equipment, at the year:
beginning of the year)—(SF6 stored in § 98.306 Data reporting requirements.
containers, but not in equipment, at the (1) Ensure that cylinders returned to
the gas supplier are consistently In addition to the information
end of the year). required by § 98.3(c), each annual report
Acquisitions of SF6 = (SF6 purchased from weighed on a scale that is certified to be
accurate and precise to within 1 percent must contain the following information
chemical producers or distributors in
bulk) + (SF6 purchased from equipment of the true weight and is periodically for each electric power system, by
manufacturers or distributors with or recalibrated per the manufacturer’s chemical:
inside equipment) + (SF6 returned to site (a) Nameplate capacity of equipment
specifications. Either measure residual
after off-site recycling). containing SF6 and nameplate capacity
Disbursements of SF6 = (SF6 in bulk and
gas (the amount of gas remaining in
of equipment containing each PFC:
contained in equipment that is sold to returned cylinders) or have the gas
(1) Existing as of the beginning of the
other entities) + (SF6 returned to supplier measure it. If the gas supplier
year.
suppliers) + (SF6 sent off site for weighs the residual gas, obtain from the
(2) New during the year.
recycling) + (SF6 sent to destruction gas supplier a detailed monthly
facilities). (3) Retired during the year.
accounting, within 1 percent, of residual
Net Increase in Total Nameplate Capacity of (b) Transmission miles (length of lines
gas amounts in the cylinders returned to
Equipment Operated = (The Nameplate carrying voltages at or above 34.5 kV).
the gas supplier.
Capacity of new equipment)— (c) SF6 and PFC sales and purchases.
(Nameplate Capacity of retiring (2) Ensure that procedures are in (d) SF6 and PFC sent off site for
equipment). (Note that Nameplate place and followed to track and weigh destruction.
Capacity refers to the full and proper all cylinders as they are leaving and (e) SF6 and PFC sent off site to be
charge of equipment rather than to the entering storage. Cylinders shall be
actual charge, which may reflect
recycled.
weighed on a scale that is certified to be (f) SF6 and PFC returned from off site
leakage.)
accurate to within 1 percent of the true after recycling.
(b) The mass-balance method in weight and the scale shall be (g) SF6 and PFC stored in containers
paragraph (a) of this section shall be recalibrated at least annually or at the at the beginning and end of the year.
used to estimate emissions of PFCs from minimum frequency specified by the (h) SF6 and PFC with or inside new
power transformers, substituting the manufacturer, whichever is more equipment purchased in the year.
relevant PFC(s) for SF6 in equation DD– frequent. All scales used to measure (i) SF6 and PFC with or inside
1. quantities that are to be reported under equipment sold to other entities.
§ 98.306 shall be calibrated using (j) SF6 and PFC returned to suppliers.
requirements. suitable NIST-traceable standards and
suitable methods published by a § 98.307 Records that must be retained.
(a) You must adhere to the following
consensus standards organization (e.g., In addition to the information
QA/QC methods for reviewing the
ISWM, ISDA, NCWM, or others). required by § 98.3(g), you must retain
completeness and accuracy of reporting:
(1) Review inputs to Equation DD–1 to Alternatively, calibration procedures records of the information reported and
ensure inputs and outputs to the specified by the scale manufacturer may listed in § 98.306.
company’s system are included. be used. Calibration shall be performed
(2) Do not enter negative inputs and prior to the first reporting year.
All terms used in this subpart have
confirm that negative emissions are not (3) Ensure all substations have
calculated. However, the Decrease in provided information to the manager
Act and subpart A of this part.
SF6 Inventory and the Net Increase in compiling the emissions report (if it is
Total Nameplate Capacity may be not already handled through an Subpart EE—Titanium Dioxide
calculated as negative numbers. electronic inventory system). Production
(3) Ensure that beginning-of-year
inventory matches end-of-year § 98.305 Procedures for estimating § 98.310 Definition of the source category.
missing data.
inventory from the previous year. The titanium dioxide production
(4) Ensure that in addition to SF6 A complete record of all measured source category consists of facilities that
purchased from bulk gas distributors, parameters used in the GHG emissions use the chloride process to produce
SF6 purchased from Original Equipment calculations is required. Replace titanium dioxide.
Manufacturers (OEM) and SF6 returned missing data, if needed, based on data
to the facility from off-site recycling are from equipment with a similar § 98.311 Reporting threshold.
also accounted for among the total nameplate capacity for SF6 and PFC, You must report GHG emissions
EP10AP09.134</MATH>
additions. and from similar equipment repair, under this subpart if your facility
contains a titanium dioxide production § 98.314 Monitoring and QA/QC Subpart FF—Underground Coal Mines
process and the facility meets the requirements.
requirements of either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2). § 98.320 Definition of the source category.
(a) You must measure your
consumption of calcined petroleum (a) This source category consists of
§ 98.312 GHGs to report. active underground coal mines and any
coke either by weighing the petroleum
(a) You must report CO2 process coke fed into your process (by belt underground mines under development
emissions from each chloride process scales or a similar device) or through the that have operational pre-mining
line as required in this subpart. use of purchase records. degasification systems. An underground
(b) Report the CO2, N2O, and CH4 coal mine is a mine at which coal is
(b) You must document the
emissions from each stationary produced by tunneling into the earth to
procedures used to ensure the accuracy
combustion unit. You must follow the a subsurface coal seam, where the coal
of monthly calcined petroleum coke
requirements of subpart C of this part. is then mined with equipment such as
consumption.
cutting machines, and transported to the
§ 98.315 Procedures for estimating surface. Active underground coal mines
You must determine CO2 emissions missing data. are mines categorized by MSHA as
for each process line in accordance with active and where coal is currently being
the procedures specified in either There are no missing data procedures
for the measurement of petroleum coke produced or has been produced within
paragraph (a) or (b) of this section. the previous 90 days.
(a) If the facility operates and consumption. A complete record of all
measured parameters used in the GHG (b) This source category comprises the
maintains a continuous emission following emission points:
monitoring system (CEMS) that meets emissions calculations is required.
(1) Each ventilation well or shaft.
the conditions specififed in § 98.316 Data reporting requirements. (2) Each degasification system well or
§ 98.33(b)(5)(ii) or (iii), then you must shaft, including degasification systems
calculate total CO2 emissions using the In addition to the information
required by § 98.3(c), each annual report deployed before, during, or after mining
Tier 4 Calculation Methodology operations are conducted in a mine area.
specified in § 98.33(a)(4). must contain the following information
specified in paragraphs (a) through (e) (c) This source category does not
(b) If the facility does not measure include abandoned (closed) mines,
total emissions with a CEMS, you must for each titanium dioxide production
line. surface coal mines, or post-coal mining
calculate the process CO2 emissions for activities.
each calcined petroleum coke process (a) Annual CO2 emissions (metric
line by determining the mass of calcined tons). § 98.321 Reporting threshold.
petroleum coke consumed in line. Use (b) Annual consumption of calcined You must report GHG emissions
Equation EE–1 of this section to petroleum coke (metric tons). under this subpart if your facility
calculate annual CO2 process emissions (c) Annual production of titanium contains a underground coal mining
for each process line: dioxide (metric tons). process and the facility meets the
(d) Annual production capacity of requirements of either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2).
12
44 2000 titanium dioxide (metric tons).
Ep = ∑ ∗ Cn ∗ (Eq. EE-1) § 98.322 GHGs to report.
n =1 12 2205 (e) Annual operating hours for each
titanium dioxide process line. You must report the following:
Where: (a) CH4 emissions from each
Ep = Annual CO2 mass emissions from each § 98.317 Records that must be retained. ventilation well or shaft and each
chloride process line (metric tons). degasification system (this includes
In addition to the records required by
Cn = Calcined petroleum coke consumption degasification systems deployed before,
in month n, tons. § 98.3(g), you must retain the following
44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to records specified in paragraphs (a) during, or after mining operations are
carbon. through (e) of this section for each conducted in a mine area).
2000/2205 = Conversion of tons to metric titanium dioxide production facility. (b) CO2 emissions from coal mine gas
tons. (a) Monthly production of titanium CH4 destruction, where the gas is not a
dioxide (metric tons). fuel input for energy generation or use.
(c) You must determine the total CO2
(b) Production capacity of titanium (c) CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions from
process emissions from the facility
dioxide (metric tons). stationary fuel combustion devices. You
using Equation EE–2 of this section:
must follow the requirements of subpart
(c) Records of all calcined petroleum C of this part.
n
coke purchases.
CO 2 = ∑ E p (Eq. EE-2) § 98.323 Calculating GHG emissions.
p −1
(d) Records of monthly calcined
petroleum coke consumption (metric (a) For each ventilation well or shaft,
Where: tons). you must estimate the quarterly CH4
CO2 = Annual CO2 emissions from titanium (e) Annual operating hours for each liberated from the mine ventilation
dioxide production facility (metric tons/ system using the measured CH4 content
year).
titanium dioxide process line.
EP10AP09.137</MATH>
Ep = Annual CO2 emissions from each

and flow rate, and Equation FF–1 of this
§ 98.318 Definitions. section. You must measure CH4 content,
chloride process line, p (in metric tons/
year), determined using Equation EE–1. All terms used in this subpart have flow rate, temperature, and pressure of
n = Number of separate chloride process the same meaning given in the Clean Air the gas using the procedures outlined in
lines located at the facility. Act and subpart A of this part. § 98.324.
EP10AP09.136</MATH>
⎛ C 520oR P 0.454 ⎞
CH 4V = n ⎜ V 0.0423 1, 440 ⎟ (Eq. FF-1)
⎝ 100% T 1 atm 1, 000 ⎠
EP10AP09.135</MATH>
Where: n = The number of days in the quarter where 0.454/1,000 = Conversion factor (metric ton/
CH4V = Quarterly CH4 liberated from active ventilation of mining operations is lb).
ventilation systems (metric tons CH4). taking place.
0.0423 = Density of CH4 at 520 °R (60 °F) and
(b) For each degasification system,
V = Measured volumetric flow rate of active you must estimate the quarterly CH4
1 atm (lb/scf).
ventilation of mining operations (cfm). liberated from the mine degasification
T = Temperature at which flow is measured
C = Measured CH4 concentration of (°R). system using measured CH4 content,
ventilation gas during active ventilation P = Pressure at which flow is measured (atm). flow rate, temperature, and pressure,
of mining operations (%, wet basis). 1,440 = Conversion factor (min/day). and Equation FF–2 of this section.
⎛ C 520oR P 0.454 ⎞
CH 4D = n ⎜ V 0.0423 1, 440 ⎟ (Eq. FF-2)
⎝ 100% T 1 atm 1, 000 ⎠
Where: in operation and the continuous 0.454/1,000 = Conversion factor (metric ton/
CH4D = Quarterly CH4 liberated from the monitoring equipment is properly lb).
degasification system (metric tons CH4). functioning (%, wet basis).
V = Measured average volumetric flow rate n = The number of days in the quarter. (c) If gas from degasification system
for the days in the quarter when the 0.0423 = Density of CH4 at 520 °R (60 °F) and wells or ventilation shafts is destroyed
degasification system is in operation and 1 atm (lb/scf). you must calculate the quarterly CH4
the continuous monitoring equipment is T = Measured average temperature at which destroyed using Equation FF–3 of this
properly functioning (cfm). flow is measured (°R). section. You must measure CH4 content
C = Estimated or measured average CH4 P = Measured average pressure at which flow
concentration of gas for the days in the is measured (atm).
and flowrate according to the provisions
quarter when the degasification system is 1,440 = Conversion factor (min/day). in § 98.324.
CH 4 destroyed = CH 4 x DE/100 (Eq. FF-3)
Where: CH4 = Amount of CH4 collected for manufacturer’s specified destruction

CH4 destroyed = Quantity of CH4 liberated destruction(metric tons). efficiency or 98 percent (%)’.
from mine that is destroyed (metric DE = Destruction efficiency of the destruction (d) You must calculate the quarterly
tons). equipment, based on the lesser of the net CH4 emissions to the atmosphere
using Equation FF–3 of this section.
CH 4 emitted (net) = CH 4V + CH 4D − CH 4 destroyed (Eq. FF-4)
Where: CH4o = CH4 destroyed, calculated using (1) Monitor emissions from each well
CH4 emitted (net) = Quarterly CH4 emissions Equation FF–3 of this section (metric or shaft where active ventilation is
from mine ventilation and degasification tons). taking place by collecting quarterly grab
systems (metric tons). DE = Destruction efficiency, based on the samples and making quarterly
CH4V = Quarterly CH4 liberated from mine lesser of the manufacturer’s specified
destruction efficiency or 98 percent (%).
measurements of flow rate, temperature,
ventilation systems, calculated using
Equation FF–1 of this section (metric 44/16 = Ratio of molecular weights of CO2 to and pressure. The sampling and
tons). CH4. measurements must be made at the
CH4D = Quarterly CH4 liberated from mine same location as MSHA inspection
degasification systems, calculated using § 98.324 Monitoring and QA/QC samples are taken. You must follow
Equation FF–2 of this section (metric requirements. MSHA sampling procedures as set forth
tons). (a) The flow and CH4 content of coal in the MSHA Handbook entitled,
CH4 destroyed = Quarterly CH4 destroyed, mine gas destroyed must be determined General Coal Mine Inspection
calculated using Equation FF–3 of this Procedures and Inspection Tracking
using ASTM D1945–03 (Reapproved
section (metric tons). EP10AP09.141</MATH>
2006), Standard Test Method for System Handbook Number: PH–08–V–1,
(e) For each degasification or Analysis of Natural Gas by Gas January 1, 2008. You must record the
ventilation system with on-site coal Chromatography; ASTM D1946–90 airflow, temperature, and pressure
mine gas CH4 destruction, where the gas (Reapproved 2006), Standard Practice measured, the hand-held methane and
is not a fuel input for energy generation for Analysis of Reformed Gas by Gas oxygen readings in percentile, the bottle
EP10AP09.140</MATH>
or use, you must estimate the CO2 Chromatography; ASTM D4891–89 number of samples collected, and the
emissions using Equation FF–5 of this (Reapproved 2006), Standard Test location of the measurement or
section. You must measure the CH4 Method for Heating Value of Gases in collection.
content and the flow rate according to Natural Gas Range by Stoichiometric (2) Obtain results of the quarterly
the provisions in § 98.324. Combustion; or UOP539–97 Refinery
EP10AP09.139</MATH>
testing performed by MSHA.

Gas Analysis by Gas Chromatography (c) For liberation of methane at
CO 2 = CH 4o 44/16 (Eq. FF-5) (incorporated by reference, see § 98.7). degasification systems, you must
Where: (b) For liberation of methane from monitor methane concentrations and
CO2 = Quarterly CO2 emissions from CH4 ventilation systems, you must do one of flow rate from each degasification well
EP10AP09.138</MATH>
destruction (metric tons). the following: or shaft using any of the oil and gas flow
meter test methods incorporated by must contain the following information Subpart GG—Zinc Production
reference in § 98.7. for each mine:
(d) All fuel flow meters and gas (a) Quarterly volumetric flow rate § 98.330 Definition of the source category.
composition monitors monitors shall be measurement results for all ventilation The zinc production source category
calibrated prior to the first reporting systems, including date and location of consists of zinc smelters and secondary
year, using a suitable method published measurement. zinc recycling facilities.
by a consensus standards organization (b) Quarterly CH4 concentration
(e.g., ASTM, ASME, API, AGA, MSHA, measurement results for all ventilation § 98.331 Reporting threshold.
or others). Alternatively, calibration systems, including date and location of You must report GHG emissions
procedures specified by the flow meter measurement. under this subpart if your facility
manufacturer may be used. Fuel flow (c) Quarterly CEMS volumetric flow contains a zinc production process and
meters, and gas composition monitors data used to calculate CH4 liberated the facility meets the requirements of
shall be recalibrated either annually or from degasification systems (summed either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2).
at the minimum frequency specified by from daily data).
the manufacturer or other applicable (d) Quarterly CEMS CH4 § 98.332 GHGs to report.
standards. concentration data used to calculate CH4 (a) You must report the CO2 process
(e) All temperature and pressure liberated from degasification systems emissions from each Waelz kiln and
monitors must be calibrated using the (average from daily data). electrothermic furnace used for zinc
procedures and frequencies specified by (e) Quarterly CH4 destruction at production, as applicable to your
the manufacturer. ventilation and degasification systems.
(f) If applicable, the owner or operator facility.
(f) Dates in reporting period where
shall document the procedures used to active ventilation of mining operations (a) You must report the CO2, CH4, and
ensure the accuracy of gas flow rate, gas is taking place. N2O emissions from each stationary
composition, temperature, and pressure (g) Dates in reporting period when combustion unit, following
measurements. These procedures continuous monitoring equipment is not requirements of subpart C of this part.
include, but are not limited to, properly functioning. § 98.333 Calculating GHG emissions.
calibration of fuel flow meters, and (h) Quarterly averages of temperatures
other measurement devices. The and pressures at the time and at the (a) If you operate and maintain a
estimated accuracy of measurements, conditions for which all measurements CEMS that measures total CO2
and the technical basis for the estimated are made. emissions consistent with the
accuracy shall be recorded. (i) Quarterly CH4 liberated from each requirements in subpart C of this part,
ventilation well or shaft, and from each you must estimate total CO2 emissions
§ 98.325 Procedures for estimating degasification system (this includes according to the requirements in
missing data. § 98.33(a).
degasification systems deployed before,
(a) A complete record of all measured during, or after mining operations are (b) If you do not operate and maintain
parameters used in the GHG emissions conducted in a mine area). a CEMS that measures total CO2
calculations is required. Therefore, (j) Quarterly CH4 emissions (net) from emissions consistent with the
whenever a quality-assured value of a each ventilation well or shaft, and from requirements in subpart C of this part,
required parameter is unavailable (e.g., each degasification system (this you must determine the total CO2
if a meter malfunctions during unit includes degasification systems emissions from the Waelz kilns or
operation or if a required fuel sample is deployed before, during, or after mining electrothermic furnaces at your facility
not taken), a substitute data value for operations are conducted in a mine used for zinc production using the
the missing parameter shall be used in area). procedures specified in paragraphs
the calculations, in accordance with (k) Quarterly CO2 emissions from on- (b)(1) and (2) of this section.
paragraph (b) of this section. site destruction of coal mine gas CH4,
(b) For each missing value of CH4 (1) For each Waelz kiln or
where the gas is not a fuel input for electrothermic furnace at your facility
concentration, flow rate, temperature, energy generation or use.
and pressure for ventilation and used for zinc production, you must
degasification systems, the substitute § 98.327 Records that must be retained. determine the mass of carbon in each
data value shall be the arithmetic In addition to the information carbon-containing material, other than
average of the quality-assured values of required by § 98.3(g), you must retain fuel, that is fed, charged, or otherwise
that parameter immediately preceding the following records: introduced into each Waelz kiln and
and immediately following the missing (a) Calibration records for all electrothermic furnace at your facility
data incident. If, for a particular monitoring equipment. for each calendar month and estimate
parameter, no quality-assured data are (b) Records of gas sales. total annual CO2 process emissions from
available prior to the missing data (c) Logbooks of parameter each affected unit at your facility using
incident, the substitute data value shall measurements. Equation GG–1. For electrothermic
be the first quality-assured value (d) Laboratory analyses of samples. furnaces, carbon containing input
obtained after the missing data period. materials include carbon eletrodes and
§ 98.328 Definitions. carbonaceous reducing agents. For
§ 98.326 Data reporting requirements. All terms used in this subpart have Waelz kilns, carbon containing input
In addition to the information the same meaning given in the Clean Air materials include carbonaceous
required by § 98.3(c), each annual report Act and subpart A of this part. reducing agents.
12
44
E CO2 = ∑ ∗ ⎡⎣( Zinc )n ∗ ( CZinc )n + ( Flux) n ∗ (CFlux ) n + ( Electrode) n ∗ ( CElectrode )n + (Carbon) n ∗ ( Cc ) ⎤⎦ (Eq. GG-1)
n =1 12
EP10AP09.142</MATH>
Where: must determine the average carbon in paragraphs (a) through (e) of this
ECO2 = Total CO2 process emissions from an content of the material for each calendar section for each Waelz kiln or
individual Waelz kiln or electrothermic month using information provided by electrothermic furnace.
furnace (metric tons per year). your material supplier or by collecting (a) Annual CO2 emissions in metric
44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to and analyzing a representative sample tons, and the method used to estimate
carbon.
(Zinc)n = Mass of zinc bearing material of the material using an analysis method emissions.
charged to the furnace in month ‘‘n’’ appropriate for the material. (b) Annual zinc product production
(metric tons). (c) For each input material identified capacity (in metric tons).
(CZinc)n = Carbon content of the zinc bearing in paragraph (a) of this section for (c) Total number of Waelz kilns and
material, from the carbon analysis results which the carbon content is not electrothermic furnaces at the facility.
for month ‘‘n’’ (percent by weight, provided by your material supplier, the (d) Number of facility operating hours
expressed as a decimal fraction). carbon content of the material must be in calendar year.
(Flux)n = Mass of flux materials (e.g., analyzed by an independent certified (e) If you use the carbon input
limestone, dolomite) charged to the procedure, report for each carbon-
furnace in month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons).
laboratory each calendar month using
(CFlux)n = Average carbon content of the flux the test methods (and their QA/QC containing input material consumed or
materials, from the carbon analysis procedures) in § 98.7. Use ASTM used (other than fuel), the information
results for month ‘‘n’’ (percent by weight, E1941–04 (‘‘Standard Test Method for specified in paragraphs (e)(1) and (2) of
expressed as a decimal fraction). Determination of Carbon in Refractory this section.
(Electrode)n = Mass of carbon electrode and Reactive Metals and Their Alloys’’) (1) Annual material quantity (in
consumed in month ‘‘n’’, for for analysis of zinc bearing materials; metric tons).
electrothermic furnace (metric tons). ASTM D5373–02 (‘‘Standard Test (2) Annual average of the monthly
(CElectrode)n = Average carbon content of the carbon content determinations for each
carbon electrode, from the carbon
Methods for Instrumental Determination
of Carbon, Hydrogen, and Nitrogen in material and the method used for the
analysis results for month ‘‘n’’, for
electrothermic furnace (percent by Laboratory Samples of Coal and Coke’’) determination (e.g., supplier provided
weight, expressed as a decimal fraction). for analysis of carbonaceous reducing information, analyses of representative
(Carbon)n = Mass of carbonaceous materials agents and carbon electrodes, and samples you collected).
(e.g., coal, coke) charged to the furnace ASTM C25–06 (‘‘Standard Test Methods
in month ‘‘n’’ (metric tons). § 98.337 Records that must be retained.
for Chemical Analysis of Limestone,
(CCarbon)n = Average carbon content of the In addition to the records required by
Quicklime, and Hydrated Lime’’) for
carbonaceous materials, from the carbon § 98.3(g) of subpart A of this part, you
analysis results for month ‘‘n’’ (percent
analysis of flux materials such as
must retain the records specified in
by weight, expressed as a decimal limestone or dolomite.
paragraphs (a) through (d) of this
fraction). section.
(2) You must determine the total CO2 missing data. (a) Monthly facility production
emissions from the Waelz kilns or For the carbon input procedure in quantity for each zinc product (in metric
electrothermic furnaces at your facility § 98.333(b), a complete record of all tons).
measured parameters used in the GHG (b) Number of facility operating hours
using Equation GG–2 of this section.
emissions calculations is required (e.g., each month.
k raw materials carbon content values, (c) Annual production Quantity for
CO 2 = ∑ E CO 2k (Eq. GG-2) etc.). Therefore, whenever a quality- each zinc product (in metric tons).
1 assured value of a required parameter is (d) If you use the carbon input
Where: unavailable, a substitute data value for procedure, record for each carbon-
the missing parameter shall be used in containing input material consumed or
CO2 = Total annual CO2 emissions, metric the calculations. used (other than fuel), the information
tons/year. (a) For each missing value of the specified in paragraphs (d)(1) and (2) of
ECO2k = Annual CO2 emissions from Waelz carbon content the substitute data value this section.
kiln or electrothermic furnace k shall be the arithmetic average of the (1) Monthly material quantity (in
calculated using Equation GG–1 of this quality-assured values of that parameter metric tons).
section, metric tons/year. (2) Monthly average carbon content
immediately preceding and immediately
k = Total number of Waelz kilns or determined for material and records of
electrothermic furnaces at facility used following the missing data incident. If,
for a particular parameter, no quality- the supplier provided information or
for the zinc production.
assured data are available prior to the analyses used for the determination.
§ 98.334 Monitoring and QA/QC missing data incident, the substitute (e) You must keep records that
requirements. data value shall be the first quality- include a detailed explanation of how
If you determine CO2 emissions using assured value obtained after the missing company records of measurements are
the carbon input procedure in data period. used to estimate the carbon input to
§ 98.333(b)(1), you must meet the (b) For missing records of the mass of each Waelz kiln or electrothermic
requirements specified in paragraphs (a) carbon-containing input material furnace, as applicable to your facility.
through (c) of this section. consumption, the substitute data value You also must document the procedures
(a) Determine the mass of each solid shall be the best available estimate of used to ensure the accuracy of the
carbon-containing input material by the mass of the input material. The measurements of materials fed, charged,
direct measurement of the quantity of owner or operator shall document and or placed in an affected unit including,
the material placed in the unit or by keep records of the procedures used for but not limited to, calibration of
calculations using process operating all such estimates. weighing equipment and other
information, and record the total mass measurement devices. The estimated
for the material for each calendar § 98.336 Data reporting requirements. accuracy of measurements made with
month. In addition to the information these devices must also be recorded,
(b) For each input material identified required by § 98.3(c), each annual report and the technical basis for these
EP10AP09.143</MATH>
in paragraph (a) of this section, you must contain the information specified estimates must be provided.
§ 98.338 Definitions. (b) This source category does not emissions from the combustion of fuels
All terms used in this subpart have include hazardous waste landfills and used in flares (e.g., for pilot gas or to
construction and demolition landfills. supplement the heating value of the
landfill gas). Follow the requirements of
Act and subpart A of this part. § 98.341 Reporting threshold. subpart C of this part. Do not calculate
You must report GHG emissions CO2 emissions resulting from the flaring
Subpart HH—Landfills
under this subpart if your facility of landfill gas.
§ 98.340 Definition of the source category. contains a landfill process and the
facility meets the requirements of either § 98.343 Calculating GHG emissions.
(a) This source category consists of § 98.2(a)(1) or (2). (a) For all landfills subject to the
the following sources at municipal solid reporting requirements of this subpart,
waste (MSW) landfill facilities: landfills, § 98.342 GHGs to report. calculate annual modeled CH4
landfill gas collection systems, and (a) You must report CH4 generation generation according to the applicable
landfill gas combustion systems and CH4 emissions from landfills. requirements in paragraphs (a)(1)
(including flares). This source category (b) You must report CH4 destruction through (4) of this section.
also includes industrial landfills resulting from landfill gas collection (1) Calculate annual modeled CH4
(including, but not limited to landfills and combustion systems. generation using recorded or estimated
located at food processing, pulp and (c) You must report CO2, CH4, and waste disposal quantities, default values
paper, and ethanol production N2O emissions from stationary fuel from Table HH–1, and Equation HH–1
facilities). combustion devices. This includes of this section.
⎡ T −1 ⎤
{ ( )}
GCH 4 = ⎢ ∑ Wx L0, x e − k (T − x −1) − e − k (T − x ) ⎥
⎣ x=S ⎦
(Eq. HH-1)
Where: designated to a specific material type. be re-calculated in subsequent reporting

GCH4 = Modeled methane generation rate in For years when waste composition data years.
reporting year T (metric tons CH4). are not available, use the bulk waste N = Number of years for which disposal and
X = Year in which waste was disposed. parameter values for k and L0 in Table production data are available.
S = Start year of calculation. Use the year 50 Wn = Quantity of waste placed in the
HH–1 of this subpart for the total industrial landfill in year n (metric tons).
years prior to the year of the emissions
estimate, or the opening year of the
quantity of waste disposed in those Pn = Quantity of product produced in year n
landfill, whichever is more recent. years. (production units).
T = Reporting year for which emissions are (3) For years prior to reporting for
calculated. which waste disposal quantities are not (ii) Calculate the waste disposal
Wx = Quantity of waste disposed in the readily available for MSW landfills, Wx quantities for historic years in which
landfill in year X from tipping fee shall be estimated using the estimated direct waste disposal measurements are
receipts or other company records population served by the landfill in not available using historical production
(metric tons, as received (wet weight)). each year, the values for national data and Equation HH–3 of this section.
L0 = CH4 generation potential (metric tons average per capita waste disposal and
CH4/metric ton waste) =
MCF*DOC*DOCF*F*16/12. fraction of generated waste disposed of Wx = WDF ∗ Px (Eq. HH-3)
MCF = Methane correction factor (fraction). in solid waste disposal sites found in
Where:
DOC = Degradable organic carbon [fraction Table HH–2 of this subpart.
(4) For industrial landfills, Wx in X = Historic year in which waste was
(metric tons C/metric ton waste)].
disposed.
DOCF = Fraction of DOC dissimilated reporting years must be determined by
Wx = Projected quantity of waste placed in
(fraction). direct mass measurement of waste
F = Fraction by volume of CH4 in landfill gas. the landfill in year X (metric tons).
entering the landfill using industrial WDF = Average waste disposal factor from
k = Rate constant (yr-1). scales with a manufacturer’s stated Equation HH–1 of this section (metric
(2) For years when material-specific accuracy of ±2 percent. For previous tons per production unit).
waste quantity data are available, and years, where data are unavailable on Px = Production quantity for the facility in
for industrial waste landfills, apply waste disposal quantities, estimate the year X from company records
Equation HH–1 of this section for each waste quantities according to the (production units).
waste quantity type and sum the CH4 requirements in paragraphs (a)(4)(i) and
(b) For landfills with gas collection
generation rates for all waste types to (ii) of this section.
(i) Calculate the average waste systems, calculate the quantity of CH4
calculate the total modeled CH4
disposal rate per unit of production for destroyed according to the requirements
generation rate for the landfill. Use the
the first applicable reporting year using in paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this
appropriate parameter values for k,
Equation HH–2 of this section. section.
DOC, MCF, DOCF, and F shown in Table
EP10AP09.146</MATH>
HH–1. The annual quantity of each type (1) Measure continuously the flow
of waste disposed must be calculated as ⎡ N ⎧ W ⎫⎤ rate, CH4 concentration, temperature,
the sum of the daily quantities of waste WDF = ⎢ ∑ ⎨ n ⎬⎥ (Eq. HH-2) and pressure, of the collected landfill
(of that type) disposed. For both MSW ⎢⎣ n =1 ⎩ N ∗ Pn ⎭⎥⎦ gas (before any treatment equipment)
using a monitoring meter specifically for
EP10AP09.145</MATH>
and industrial landfills, you may use the Where:

bulk waste parameters for a portion of CH4 gas, as specified in § 98.344.
WDF = Average waste disposal factor
your waste materials when using the determined on the first year of reporting (2) Calculate the quantity of CH4
material-specific modeling approach for (metric tons per production unit). The recovered for destruction using
mixed waste streams that cannot be average waste disposal factor should not Equation HH–4 of this section.
EP10AP09.144</MATH>
365
⎛ Cn 520oR P 0.454 ⎞
R = ∑ ⎜ Vn ∗ ∗ 0.0423 ∗ ∗ n ∗ 1, 440 ∗ ⎟ (Eq. HH-4)
n =1 ⎝ 100% Tn 1 atm 1, 000 ⎠
Where: account any CH4 recovery, and OX = Oxidation fraction default rate is 0.1
R = Annual quantity of recovered CH4 (metric oxidation in cover materials) according (10%).
tons CH4). to the applicable methods in paragraphs
Vn = Daily average volumetric flow rate for (d)(1) through (4) of this section. (2) For landfills that do not have
day n (acfm). landfill gas collection systems, the CH4
Cn = Daily average CH4 concentration of (1) Calculate CH4 generation, adjusted emissions are equal to the CH4
landfill gas for day n (%, wet basis). for oxidation, from the modeled CH4 generation calculated in Equation HH–
0.0423 = Density of CH4 lb/scf (at 520°R or (GCH4 from Equation HH–1) using 5 of this section.
60°F and 1 atm). Equation HH–5 of this section.
Tn = Temperature at which flow is measured (3) For landfills with landfill gas
for day n (°R).
Pn = Pressure at which flow is measured for
MG = G CH 4 (1 − OX) (Eq. HH-5) collection systems, calculate CH4
emissions using the methodologies
day n (atm). Where:
1,440 = Conversion factor (min/day). specified in paragraphs (c)(3)(i) and (ii)
MG = Methane generation from the landfill of this section.
0.454/1,000 = Conversion factor (metric ton/
in the reporting year, adjusted for
lb). (i) Calculate CH4 emissions from the
oxidation (metric tons CH4).
(c) Calculate CH4 generation (adjusted GCH4 = Modeled methane generation rate in modeled CH4 generation and measured
for oxidation in cover materials) and reporting year from Equation HH–1 of CH4 recovery using Equation HH–6 of
actual CH4 emissions (taking into this section (metric tons CH4). this section.
Emissions = ⎡⎣( G CH 4 − R ) ∗ (1 − OX ) + R (1 − DE ) ⎤⎦ (Eq. HH-6)
Where: R = Quantity of recovered CH4 from Equation and estimated gas collection efficiency
Emissions = Methane emissions from the HH–4 of this section (metric tons). and Equations HH–7 and HH–8, of this
landfill in the reporting year (metric tons OX = Oxidation fraction default rate is 0.1
section.
CH4). (10%).
DE = Destruction efficiency (lesser of
GCH4 = Modeled methane generation rate in R
manufacturer’s specified destruction
reporting year from Equation HH–1 of
efficiency and 0.99) MG = (1 − OX) (Eq. HH-7)
this section or the quantity of recovered CE
CH4 from Equation HH–4 of this section, (ii) Calculate CH4 generation and CH4
whichever is greater (metric tons CH4). emissions using measured CH4 recovery
⎡⎛ R ⎞ ⎤
Emissions = ⎢⎜ − R ⎟ ∗ (1 − OX ) + R (1 − DE ) ⎥ (Eq. HH-8)
⎢⎣⎝ CE CH 4 ⎠ ⎥⎦
Where: Technical Requirements For Weighing Gas Chromatography; ASTM D1946–90

MG = Methane generation from the landfill and Measuring Devices’’ NIST (Reapproved 2006), Standard Practice
in the reporting year (metric tons CH4). Handbook 44, 2008. for Analysis of Reformed Gas by Gas
Emissions = Methane emissions from the (b) The quantity of landfill gas CH4 Chromatography; ASTM D4891–89
EP10AP09.151</MATH>
landfill in the reporting year (metric tons (Reapproved 2006), Standard Test
destroyed must be determined using
CH4). Method for Heating Value of Gases in
R = Quantity of recovered CH4 from Equation ASTM D1945–03 (Reapproved 2006),
HH–4 of this section (metric tons CH4). Standard Test Method for Analysis of Natural Gas Range by Stoichiometric
CE = Collection efficiency estimated at Natural Gas by Gas Chromatography; Combustion; or UOP539–97 Refinery
landfill, taking into account system ASTM D1946–90 (Reapproved 2006), Gas Analysis by Gas Chromatography
EP10AP09.150</MATH>
coverage, operation, and cover system Standard Practice for Analysis of (incorporated by reference, see § 98.7).
materials. (Default is 0.75). Reformed Gas by Gas Chromatography; Alternatively, calibration procedures
OX = Oxidation fraction (default rate is 0.1 ASTM D4891–89 (Reapproved 2006), specified by the flow meter
(10%)). Standard Test Method for Heating Value manufacturer may be used. Fuel flow
DE = Destruction efficiency, (lesser of meters, and gas composition monitors
of Gases in Natural Gas Range by
EP10AP09.149</MATH>
manufacturer’s specified destruction shall be recalibrated either annually or

efficiency and 0.99). Stoichiometric Combustion; or
UOP539–97 Refinery Gas Analysis by at the minimum frequency specified by
§ 98.344 Monitoring and QA/QC Gas Chromatography (incorporated by the manufacturer.
requirements. reference, see § 98.7). (d) All temperature and pressure
monitors must be calibrated using the
EP10AP09.148</MATH>
(a) The quantity of waste landfilled (c) All fuel flow meters and gas
must be determined using mass composition monitors shall be procedures and frequencies specified by
measurement equipment meeting the calibrated prior to the first reporting the manufacturer.
requirements for commercial weighing year, using ASTM D1945–03 (e) The owner or operator shall
equipment as described in (Reapproved 2006), Standard Test document the procedures used to ensure
EP10AP09.147</MATH>
‘‘Specifications, Tolerances, and Other Method for Analysis of Natural Gas by the accuracy of the estimates of disposal
quantities and, if applicable, gas flow (c) For missing daily waste disposal (ii) and indicate which values are
rate, gas composition, temperature, and data for disposal in reporting years, the calculated using the methodologies in
pressure measurements. These substitute value shall be the average § 98.343(c)(ii).
procedures include, but are not limited daily waste disposal quantity for that (l) Landfill design capacity.
to, calibration of weighing equipment, day of the week as measured on the (m) Estimated year of landfill closure.
fuel flow meters, and other week before and week after the missing (n) Total volumetric flow of landfill
measurement devices. The estimated daily data. gas for landfills with gas collection
accuracy of measurements made with systems.
these devices shall also be recorded, and § 98.346 Data reporting requirements.
(o) CH4 concentration of landfill gas
the technical basis for these estimates In addition to the information for landfills with gas collection systems.
shall be provided. required by § 98.3(c), each annual report (p) Monthly average temperature at
must contain the following information which flow is measured for landfills
§ 98.345 Procedures for estimating for each landfill.
missing data.
with gas collection systems.
(a) Waste disposal for each year of (q) Monthly average pressure at which
A complete record of all measured landfilling. flow is measured for landfills with gas
parameters used in the GHG emissions (b) Method for estimating waste
collection systems.
calculations is required. Therefore, disposal.
(r) Destruction efficiency used for
whenever a quality-assured value of a (c) Waste composition, if available, in
landfills with gas collection systems.
required parameter is unavailable (e.g., percentage categorized as—
(1) Municipal, (s) Methane destruction for landfills
if a meter malfunctions during unit with gas collection systems (total
operation or if a required fuel sample is (2) Construction and demolition,
(3) Biosolids or biological sludges, annual, metric tons/year).
not taken), a substitute data value for (t) Estimated gas collection system
the missing parameter shall be used in (4) Industrial, inorganic,
(5) Industrial, organic, efficiency for landfills with gas
the calculations, according to the collection systems.
(6) Other, or more refined categories,
requirements in paragraphs (a) through (u) Methodology for estimating gas
such as those for which k rates are
(c) of this section. collection system efficiency for landfills
available in Table HH–1 of this subpart.
(a) For each missing value of the CH4 (d) Method for estimating waste with gas collection systems.
content, the substitute data value shall composition. (v) Cover system description.
be the arithmetic average of the quality- (e) Fraction of CH4 in landfill gas (w) Number of wells in gas collection
assured values of that parameter based on measured values if the landfill system.
immediately preceding and immediately has a gas collection system or a default. (x) Acreage and quantity of waste
following the missing data incident. If, (f) Oxidation fraction used in the covered by intermediate cap.
for a particular parameter, no quality- calculations. (y) Acreage and quantity of waste
assured data are available prior to the (g) Degradable organic carbon (DOC) covered by final cap.
missing data incident, the substitute used in the calculations. (z) Total CH4 generation from
data value shall be the first quality- (h) Decay rate k used in the landfills.
assured value obtained after the missing calculations. (aa) Total CH4 emissions from
data period. (i) Fraction of DOC dissimilated used landfills.
(b) For missing gas flow rates, the in the calculations.
substitute data value shall be the (j) Methane correction factor used in § 98.347 Records that must be retained.
arithmetic average of the quality-assured the calculations. In addition to the information
values of that parameter immediately (k) Annual methane generation and required by § 98.3(g), you must retain
preceding and immediately following methane emissions (metric tons/year) the calibration records for all
the missing data incident. If, for a according to the methodologies in monitoring equipment.
particular parameter, no quality-assured § 98.343(c)(1) through (3). Landfills with
data are available prior to the missing gas collection system must separately § 98.348 Definitions.
data incident, the substitute data value report methane generation and All terms used in this subpart have
shall be the first quality-assured value emissions according to the the same meaning given in the Clean Air
obtained after the missing data period. methodologies in § 98.343(c)(3)(i) and Act and subpart A of this part.
TABLE HH–1 OF SUBPART HH—EMISSIONS FACTORS, OXIDATION FACTORS AND METHODS

Factor Default value Units
Waste model—bulk waste option
k (precipitation <20 inches/year) ........................ 0.02 .................................................................. yr¥1

k (precipitation 20–40 inches/year) .................... 0.038 ................................................................ yr¥1
k (precipitation >40 inches/year) ........................ 0.057 ................................................................ yr¥1
L0 (Equivalent to DOC = 0.2028 when MCF=1, 0.067 ................................................................ metric tons CH4/ metric ton waste.
DOCF=0.5, and F=0.5).
Waste model—All MSW and industrial waste landfills
MCF .................................................................... 1 .......................................................................

DOCF .................................................................. 0.5 ....................................................................
F ......................................................................... 0.5 ....................................................................
TABLE HH–1 OF SUBPART HH—EMISSIONS FACTORS, OXIDATION FACTORS AND METHODS—Continued

Factor Default value Units
Waste model—MSW using waste composition option
DOC (food waste) .............................................. 0.15 .................................................................. Weight fraction, wet basis.
DOC (garden) ..................................................... 0.2 .................................................................... Weight fraction, wet basis.
DOC (paper) ....................................................... 0.4 .................................................................... Weight fraction, wet basis.
DOC (wood and straw) ....................................... 0.43 .................................................................. Weight fraction, wet basis.
DOC (textiles) ..................................................... 0.24 .................................................................. Weight fraction, wet basis.
DOC (diapers) .................................................... 0.24 .................................................................. Weight fraction, wet basis.
DOC (sewage sludge) ........................................ 0.05 .................................................................. Weight fraction, wet basis.
DOC (bulk waste) ............................................... 0.20 .................................................................. Weight fraction, wet basis.
k (food waste) ..................................................... 0.06 to 0.185 a .................................................. yr¥1
k (garden) ........................................................... 0.05 to 0.10 a .................................................... yr¥1
k (paper) ............................................................. 0.04 to 0.06 a .................................................... yr¥1
k (wood and straw) ............................................. 0.02 to 0.03 a .................................................... yr¥1
k (textiles) ........................................................... 0.04 to 0.06 a .................................................... yr¥1
k (diapers) .......................................................... 0.05 to 0.10 a .................................................... yr¥1
k (sewage sludge) .............................................. 0.06 to 0.185 a .................................................. yr¥1
Waste model—Industrial waste landfills
DOC (food processing) ...................................... 0.15 .................................................................. Weight fraction, wet basis.
DOC (pulp and paper) ........................................ 0.2 .................................................................... Weight fraction, wet basis.
k (food processing) ............................................. 0.185 ................................................................ yr¥1
k (pulp and paper) .............................................. 0.06 .................................................................. yr¥1
Calculating methane generation and emissions
OX ...................................................................... 0.1.
DE ....................................................................... 0.99.
a Use the lesser value when the potential evapotranspiration rate exceeds the mean annual precipitation rate and the greater value when it
does not.
TABLE HH–2 OF SUBPART HH—U.S. PER CAPITA WASTE DISPOSAL RATES

Waste per
Year capita ton/cap/ % to SWDS
yr
1940 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.64 100

1941 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.64 100
1942 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.64 100
1943 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.64 100
1944 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.63 100
1945 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.64 100
1946 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.64 100
1947 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.63 100
1948 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.63 100
1949 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.63 100
1950 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.63 100
1951 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.63 100
1952 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.63 100
1953 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.63 100
1954 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.63 100
1955 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.63 100
1956 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.63 100
1957 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.63 100
1958 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.63 100
1959 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.63 100
1960 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.63 100
1961 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.64 100
1962 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.64 100
1963 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.65 100
1964 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.65 100
1965 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.66 100
1966 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.66 100
1967 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.67 100
1968 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.68 100
1969 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.68 100
1970 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.69 100
1971 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.69 100
1972 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.70 100
1973 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.71 100
TABLE HH–2 OF SUBPART HH—U.S. PER CAPITA WASTE DISPOSAL RATES—Continued

Waste per
Year capita ton/cap/ % to SWDS
yr
1974 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.71 100

1975 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.72 100
1976 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.73 100
1977 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.73 100
1978 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.74 100
1979 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.75 100
1980 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.75 100
1981 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.76 100
1982 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.77 100
1983 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.77 100
1984 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.78 100
1985 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.79 100
1986 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.79 100
1987 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.80 100
1988 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.80 100
1989 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.85 84
1990 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.84 77
1991 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.78 76
1992 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.76 72
1993 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.78 71
1994 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.77 67
1995 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.72 63
1996 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.71 62
1997 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.72 61
1998 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.78 61
1999 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.78 60
2000 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.84 61
2001 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.95 63
2002 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1.06 66
2003 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1.06 65
2004 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1.06 64
2005 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1.06 64
2006 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1.06 64
Subpart II—Wastewater Treatment § 98.351 Reporting threshold. For flares, calculate the CO2 emissions
You must report GHG emissions only from pilot gas and other auxiliary
§ 98.350 Definition of source category. under this subpart if your facility fuels combusted in the flare, as
(a) A wastewater treatment system is contains a wastewater treatment process specified in subpart C of this part. Do
the collection of all processes that treat and the facility meets the requirements not include CO2 emissions resulting
or remove pollutants and contaminants, of either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2). from the combustion of anaerobic
such as soluble organic matter, digester gas.
suspended solids, pathogenic § 98.352 GHGs to report.
organisms, and chemicals from waters (a) You must report annual CH4 § 98.353 Calculating GHG emissions.
released from industrial processes. This emissions from anaerobic wastewater (a) Estimate the annual CH4 mass
source category applies to on-site treatment processes. emissions from systems other than
wastewater treatment systems at pulp (b) You must report annual CO2 digesters using Equation II–1 of this
and paper mills, food processing plants, emissions from oil/water separators at section. The value of flow and COD
ethanol production plants, petroleum refineries. must be determined in accordance with
petrochemical facilities, and petroleum (c) You must report CO2, CH4, and the monitoring requirements specified
refining facilities. N2O emissions from the combustion of in § 98.354. The flow and COD should
(b) This source category does not fuels in stationary combustion devices reflect the wastewater treated
include centralized domestic and fuels used in flares by following the anaerobically on site in anaerobic
wastewater treatment plants. requirements of subpart C of this part. systems such as lagoons.
12
CH 4 = ∑ [ Flow n ∗ COD ∗ Bo ∗ MCF ∗ 0.001] (Eq. II-1)
n =1
Where: Flown = Volumetric flow rate of wastewater anaerobic treatment systems other than
CH4 = Annual CH4 mass emissions from the sent to an anaerobic treatment system in digesters (kg/m3).
wastewater treatment system (metric month n (m3/month). B0 = Maximum CH4 producing potential of
tons). COD = Average monthly value for chemical wastewater (kg CH4/kg COD), default is
oxygen demand of wastewater entering 0.25.
EP10AP09.152</MATH>
MCF = CH4 conversion factor, based on (b) For each petroleum refining wastewater treated, and default values
relevant values in Table II–1. facility having an on-site oil/water for emission factors by separator type
0.001 = Conversion factor from kg to metric separator, estimate the annual CO2 mass from Table II–1 of this subpart. The flow
tons. emissions using Equation II–2 using should reflect the wastewater treated in
measured values for the volume of the oil/water separator.
12
⎡ 44 ⎤
CO 2 = ∑ ⎢ EFsep ∗ VH2O ∗ C ∗ ∗ 0.001 metric tons CH 4 / kg ⎥ (Eq. II-2)
n =1 ⎣ 12 ⎦
Where: 44/12 = Conversion factor for carbon to Where:

CO2 = Annual emissions of CO2 from oil/ carbon dioxide. CH4d = Annual quantity of CH4 destroyed
water separators (metric tons/yr). 0.001 = Conversion factor from kg to metric (kg/yr).
EFsep = Emissions factor for the type of tons. CH4AD = Annual quantity of CH4 generated
separator (kg NMVOC/m3 wastewater (c) For each anaerobic digester, by anaerobic digester, as calculated in
treated). estimate the annual mass of CH4 Equation II–4 of this section (metric tons
VH20 = Volumetric flow rate of wastewater destroyed using Equations II–3 and II– CH4).
treated through oil/water separator in 4 of this section. DE = CH4 destruction efficiency from flaring
month m (m3/month). or burning in engine (lesser of
C = Carbon fraction in NMVOC (default = manufacturer’s specified destruction
CH 4 d = CH 4 AD ∗ DE (Eq. II-3)
0.6). efficiency and 0.99).
365
⎡ Cn 520 R P 0.454 metric ton ⎤
CH 4 AD = ∑ ⎢ Vn 0.0423 n 1, 440 minutes/day ⎥ (Eq. II-4)
n =1 ⎣ 100% Tn 1 atm 1, 000 pounds ⎦
Where: treatment system does not vary. In this (i) If applicable, the owner or operator
CH4AD = Annual quantity of CH4 generated case, facilities must collect 24-hour shall document the procedures used to
by anaerobic digestion (metric tons CH4/ time-weighted composites to ensure the accuracy of gas flow rate, gas
yr). characterize changes in wastewater due composition, temperature, and pressure
Vn = Daily average volumetric flow rate for to production fluctuations, or a grab measurements. These procedures
day n, as determined from daily
monitoring specified in § 98.354 (acfm). sample if the influent flow is equalized include, but are not limited to,
Cn = Daily average CH4 concentration of resulting in little variability. calibration fuel flow meters, and other
digester gas for day n, as determined (d) For oil/water separators, facilities measurement devices. The estimated
from daily monitoring specified in must monitor the flow no less than once accuracy of measurements made with
§ 98.354 (%, wet basis). per week. The sample location must these devices shall also be recorded, and
0.0423 = Density of CH4 lb/scf (at 520 °R or represent the influent to oil/water the technical basis for these estimates
60 °F and 1 atm).
separator for the time period that is shall be provided.
Tn = Temperature at which flow is measured
for day n (°R). monitored.
Pn = Pressure at which flow is measured for (e) The quantity of gas destroyed must missing data.
day n (atm). be determined using any of the oil and
gas flow meter test methods A complete record of all measured
§ 98.354 Monitoring and QA/QC parameters used in the GHG emissions
incorporated by reference in § 98.7.
requirements.
(f) All gas flow meters and gas calculations is required. Therefore,
(a) The quantity of COD treated whenever a quality-assured value of a
anaerobically must be determined using composition monitors shall be
calibrated prior to the first reporting required parameter is unavailable (e.g.,
analytical methods for industrial if a meter malfunctions during unit
wastewater pollutants and must be year, using a suitable method published
by a consensus standards organization operation or if a required fuel sample is
conducted in accordance with the not taken), a substitute data value for
methods specified in 40 CFR part 136. (e.g., ASTM, ASME, API, AGA, or
others). Alternatively, calibration the missing parameter shall be used in
(b) All flow meters must be calibrated
procedures specified by the flow meter the calculations, according to the
using the procedures and frequencies
manufacturer may be used. Gas flow following requirements in paragraphs
specified by the device manufacturer.
(c) For anaerobic treatment systems, meters and gas composition monitors (a) and (b) of this section:
facilities must monitor the wastewater shall be recalibrated either annually or (a) For each missing monthly value of
flow and COD no less than once per at the minimum frequency specified by COD or wastewater flow treated, the
EP10AP09.155</MATH>
week. The sample location must the manufacturer. substitute data value shall be the
represent the influent to anaerobic (g) All temperature and pressure arithmetic average of the quality-assured
treatment for the time period that is monitors must be calibrated using the values of those parameters for the weeks
monitored. The flow sample must procedures and frequencies specified by immediately preceding and immediately
the device manufacturer.
EP10AP09.154</MATH>
correspond to the location used to following the missing data incident. For
measure the COD. Facilities must collect (h) All equipment (temperature and each missing value of the CH4 content
24-hour flow-weighted composite pressure monitors and gas flow meters or gas flow rates, the substitute data
samples, unless they can demonstrate and gas composition monitors) shall be value shall be the arithmetic average of
that the COD concentration and maintained as specified by the the quality-assured values of that
EP10AP09.153</MATH>
wastewater flow into the anaerobic manufacturer. parameter immediately preceding and
immediately following the missing data (e) B0. (o) Pressure at which flow is
incident. (f) MCF. measured (facilities with anaerobic
(b) If, for a particular parameter, no (g) Methane emissions. digesters).
quality-assured data are available prior (p) Destruction efficiency used
to the missing data incident, the (h) Type of oil/water separator (facilities with anaerobic digesters).
substitute data value shall be the first (petroleum refineries).
(q) Methane destruction (facilities
quality-assured value obtained after the (i) Emissions factor for the type of with anaerobic digesters).
missing data period. separator (petroleum refineries). (r) Fugitive methane (facilities with
(j) Carbon fraction in NMVOC anaerobic digesters).
§ 98.356 Data reporting requirements. (petroleum refineries).
In addition to the information § 98.357 Records that must be retained.
(k) CO2 emissions (petroleum
required by § 98.3(c), each annual report refineries). In addition to the information
must contain the following information required by § 98.3(g), you must retain
for the wastewater treatment system. (l) Total volumetric flow of digester
gas (facilities with anaerobic digesters). the calibration records for all
(a) Type of wastewater treatment monitoring equipment.
system. (m) CH4 concentration of digester gas
(b) Percent of wastewater treated at (facilities with anaerobic digesters). § 98.358 Definitions.
each system component. (n) Temperature at which flow is All terms used in this subpart have
(c) COD. measured (facilities with anaerobic the same meaning given in the Clean Air
(d) Influent flow rate. digesters). Act and subpart A of this part.
TABLE II–1 OF SUBPART II—EMISSION FACTORS

Default
Factors Units
value
B0 ................................................................................................... 0.25 Kg CH4/kg COD.

MCF—anaerobic deep lagoon, anaerobic reactor (e.g., upflow 0.8 Fraction.
anaerobic sludge blanket, fixed film).
MCF—anaerobic shallow lagoon (less than 2 m) ........................ 0.2 Fraction.
MCF—centralized aerobic treatment system, well managed ....... 0 Fraction.
MCF—Centralized aerobic treatment system, not well managed 0.3 Fraction.
(overloaded).
Anaerobic digester for sludge ....................................................... 0.8 Fraction.
C fraction in NMOC ....................................................................... 0.6 Fraction.
EF sep—Gravity Type (Uncovered) .............................................. 1.11E–01 Kg NMVOC/m3 wastewater
EF sep—Gravity Type (Covered) ................................................. 3.30E–03 Kg NMVOC/m3 wastewater.
EF sep—Gravity Type—(Covered and Connected to a Destruc- 0 Kg NMVOC/m3 wastewater.
tion Device).
DAF or IAF—uncovered ................................................................ 4.00E–34 Kg NMVOC/m3 wastewater.
DAF or IAF—covered .................................................................... 1.20E–44 Kg NMVOC/m3 wastewater.
DAF or IAF—covered and connected to a destruction device ..... 0 Kg NMVOC/m3 wastewater.
DAF = dissolved air flotation type.
IAF = induced air flotation type.
Subpart JJ—Manure Management spread or pasture/range/paddock and turkey production on litter, and
systems. deep bedding systems for cattle and
§ 98.360 Definition of the source category. swine.
(a) This source category consists of § 98.361 Reporting threshold.
You must report GHG emissions (6) Manure composting.
manure management systems for
livestock manure. under this subpart if your facility (b) You must report CO2, CH4, and
(b) A manure management system is contains a manure management system N2O emissions from the combustion of
as a system that stabilizes or stores and the facility meets the requirements supplemental fuels used in flares by
livestock manure in one or more of the of either § 98.2(a)(1) or (2). following the requirements of subpart C
following system components: of this part. For flares, calculate the CO2
uncovered anaerobic lagoons, liquid/ § 98.362 GHGs to report.
emissions only from pilot gas and other
slurry systems, storage pits, digesters, (a) You must report annual aggregate auxiliary fuels combusted in the flare, as
drylots, solid manure storage, feedlots CH4 and N2O emissions for each of the specified in subpart C of this part. Do
and other dry lots, high rise houses for following manure management system not include CO2 emissions resulting
poultry production (poultry without (MMS) components at the facility: from the combustion of digester gas in
litter), poultry production with litter, (1) Liquid/slurry systems such as flares.
deep bedding systems for cattle and tanks and ponds.
swine, and manure composting. This (2) Storage pits. (c) A facility that is subject to this rule
definition of manure management (3) Uncovered anaerobic lagoons used only because of emissions from manure
system encompasses the treatment of for stabilization or storage or both. management systems is not required to
wastewaters from manure. (4) Digesters, including covered report emissions from fuels used in
(c) This source category does not anaerobic lagoons. stationary combustion devices other
include components at a livestock (5) Solid manure storage including than flares.
operation unrelated to the stabilization feedlots and other dry lots, high rise
or storage of manure such as daily houses for caged laying hens, broiler

(a) For manure management systems
except digesters, estimate the annual
CH4 emissions using Equation JJ–1.
CH 4 Emissions (kg/yr) = ∑ animal type ⎡⎣ ∑ MMS [TVS VSMMS 365.25 days/yr B0 MCFMMS ] 0.662 kg CH 4 /m3 ⎤⎦ (Eq. JJ-1)
Where: VSMMS = Percent of manure that is managed B0 = Maximum CH4-producing capacity, as

TVS = Total volatile solids excreted by in each MMS (decimal) (assumed to be specified in Table JJ–1 of this section (m3
animal type, calculated using Equation equivalent to the amount of VS in each CH4/kg VS).
system). MCFMMS = CH4 conversion factor for MMS,
JJ–2 of this section (kg/day).
as specified in Table JJ–2 of this section
(decimal).
TVS = %TVS (Population TAM MER/1000) (Eq. JJ-2)
Where: Population = Average annual animal (b) For each digester, estimate the
TVS = Total volatile solids excreted per population (head). annual CH4 flow to the combustion
TAM = Typical animal mass, using either
animal type (kg/day). device using Equation JJ–3 of this
default values in Table JJ–1 of this
%TVS = Annual average percent total section, the amount of CH4 destroyed
section or farm-specific data (kg/head).
volatile solids by animal type, as MER = Manure excretion rate, using either using Eq JJ–4 of this section, and the
determined from monthly manure default values in Table JJ–1 of this amount of CH4 leakage using Equation
monitoring as specified in § 98.364 section or farm-specific data (kg manure/ JJ–5 of this section.
(decimal). day/1,000 kg animal mass).
365
⎛ Cn 520oR P 0.454 metric ton ⎞
CH 4 D = ∑ ⎜ Vn ∗ ∗ 0.0423 ∗ ∗ n ∗ 1, 440 minutes/day ∗ ⎟ (Eq. JJ-3)
n=1 ⎝ 100% Tn 1 atm 1,000 pounds ⎠
Where: monitoring as specified in § 98.364 0.0423 = Density of CH4 lb/scf (at 520 °R or
CH4D = Methane flow to digester combustion (acfm). 60 °F and 1 atm).
device (metric tons CH4/yr) Cn = Daily average CH4 concentration of Tn = Temperature at which flow is measured
digester gas for day n, as determined for day n(°R).
Vn = Daily average volumetric flow rate for
from daily monitoring as specified in Pn = Pressure at which flow is measured for
day n, as determined from daily § 98.364 (%, wet basis) day n (atm).
CH 4 Destruction at Digesters (kg/yr) = CH 4 D DE OH/Hours (Eq. JJ-4)
EP10AP09.160</MATH>
Where: calculated in Equation JJ–4 of this manufacturer’s specified destruction
CH4D = Annual quantity of CH4 flow to section (metric tons CH4). efficiency and 0.99).
DE = CH4 destruction efficiency from flaring OH = Number of hours combustion device is
EP10AP09.159</MATH>
digester combustion device, as
or burning in engine (lesser of functioning in reporting year.
Hours = Hours in reporting year.
⎛ 1 ⎞
CH 4 Leakage at Digesters (kg/yr) = CH 4 D × ⎜ − 1⎟ (Eq. JJ-5) EP10AP09.158</MATH>
⎝ CE ⎠
CH4D = Annual quantity of CH4 combusted CE = CH4 collection efficiency of anaerobic (c) For each manure management
EP10AP09.157</MATH>
by digester, as calculated in Equation JJ– digester, as specified in Table JJ–3 of this system type, estimate the annual N2O
4 of this section (metric tons CH4). section (decimal). emissions using Equation JJ–6 of this
section.
Direct N 2 O Emissions (kg/yr) =

EP10AP09.187</MATH>
∑ animal type ⎡⎣ ∑ MMS N ex x N ex,MMS x EFMMS x 365.25 days/yr ⎤⎦ x 44 N 2 O/28 N 2 O-N ] (Eq. JJ-6)
EP10AP09.156</MATH>
Where: Nex,MMS = Percent of manure that is managed EFMMS = Emission factor for MMS, as
Nex = Total nitrogen excreted per animal in each MMS (decimal) (assumed to be specified in Table JJ–4 of this section (kg
type, calculated using Equation JJ–7 of equivalent to the amount of Nex in each N2O–N/kg N).
this section (kg/day). system).
N ex = N Manure × (Population × TAM × MER/1000) (Eq. JJ-7)
Where: monitoring, as specified in § 98.364 MER = Manure excretion rate, using either
Nex = Total nitrogen excreted per animal type (decimal). default values in Table JJ–1 of this
(kg/day). Population = Average annual animal section or farm-specific data (kg manure/
population (head). day/1,000 kg animal mass).
NManure = Annual average percent of nitrogen
present in manure by animal type, as TAM = Typical animal mass, using either (d) Estimate the annual total annual
determined from monthly manure default values in Table JJ–1 of this emissions using Equation JJ–8 of this
section or farm-specific data (kg/head). section.
Total Emissions (metric tons CO 2 e /yr ) = [(CH 4 emissions + CH 4 flow to digester combustion
device − CH 4 destruction of digester + CH 4 leakage of digester) (Eq. JJ-8)
x 1 metric ton/1000 kg x 21] +[direct N 2 O emissions x 1 metric ton/1000 kg x 310]
Where: analyses should be certified for analysis maintained as specified by the

CH4 emissions = From Equation JJ–1 of this of waste for National Pollutant manufacturer.
section. Discharge Elimination System (h) If applicable, the owner or
CH4 flow to digester combustion device = compliance reporting. The sample operator shall document the procedures
From Equation JJ–3 of this section. analyzed should be a representative used to ensure the accuracy of gas flow
CH4 destruction of digester = From Equation rate, gas composition, temperature, and
JJ–4 of this section.
composite of freshly excreted manure
CH4 leakage of digester = From Equation JJ– from each animal type contributing to pressure measurements. These
5 of this section. the manure management system. procedures include, but are not limited
21 = Global Warming Potential of CH4. Sample collection and analysis must be to, calibration of fuel flow meters, and
Direct N2O emissions = from Equation JJ–6 of monthly. other measurement devices. The
this section. (d) The flow and CH4 concentration of estimated accuracy of measurements
310 = Global Warming Potential of N2O. gas from digesters must be determined made with these devices shall also be
§ 98.364 Monitoring and QA/QC using ASTM D1945–03 (Reapproved recorded, and the technical basis for
requirements. 2006), Standard Test Method for these estimates shall be provided.
(a) Perform a one-time analysis on Analysis of Natural Gas by Gas
your operation to determine the percent Chromatography; ASTM D1946–90 missing data.
of total manure by weight that is (Reapproved 2006), Standard Practice
(a) A complete record of all measured
managed in each on-site manure for Analysis of Reformed Gas by Gas
parameters used in the GHG emissions
management system. Chromatography; ASTM D4891–89
calculations is required. Therefore,
(b) Determine the annual average (Reapproved 2006), Standard Test
whenever a quality-assured value of a
percent total volatile solids by animal Method for Heating Value of Gases in
required parameter is unavailable (e.g.,
type, (%TVS) by analysis of a Natural Gas Range by Stoichiometric
if a meter malfunctions during unit
representative sample using Method Combustion; or UOP539–97 Refinery
operation or if a required fuel sample is
160.4 (Residue, Volatile) as described in Gas Analysis by Gas Chromatography
not taken), a substitute data value for
Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water (incorporated by reference in § 98.7).
the missing parameter shall be used in
and Wastes, EPA–600/4–79/020, (e) All temperature and pressure the calculations, according to the
Revised March 1983. The laboratory monitors must be calibrated using the requirements in paragraph (b) of this
performing the analyses should be procedures and frequencies specified by section.
certified for analysis of waste for the manufacturer. (b) For missing gas flow rates, volatile
National Pollutant Discharge (f) All gas flow meters and gas solids, or nitrogen or methane content
Elimination System compliance composition monitors shall be data, the substitute data value shall be
reporting. The sample analyzed should calibrated prior to the first reporting the arithmetic average of the quality-
be a representative composite of freshly year, using a suitable method published assured values of that parameter
excreted manure from each animal type by a consensus standards organization immediately preceding and immediately
contributing to the manure management (e.g., ASTM, ASME, API, AGA, or following the missing data incident. If,
system. Total volatile solids of manure others). Alternatively, calibration for a particular parameter, no quality-
must be sampled and analyzed monthly. procedures specified by the flow meter assured data are available prior to the
(c) Determine the annual average manufacturer may be used. Gas flow missing data incident, the substitute
percent of nitrogen present in manure meters and gas composition monitors data value shall be the first quality-
EP10AP09.162</MATH>
by animal type (NManure) by analysis of shall be recalibrated either annually or assured value obtained after the missing
a representative sample using Method at the minimum frequency specified by data period.
351.3 as described in Methods for the manufacturer.
Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes, (g) All equipment (temperature and § 98.366 Data reporting requirements.
EPA–600/4–79–020, Revised March pressure monitors and gas flow meters In addition to the information
EP10AP09.161</MATH>
1983. The laboratory performing the and gas composition monitors) shall be required by § 98.3(c), each annual report
must contain the following information (h) Monthly nitrogen content of (q) Methane destruction (for systems
for each manure management system excreted manure. with digesters).
component: (i) N2O emission factor selected. (r) Methane generation from the
(a) Type of manure management (j) CH4 emissions digesters.
system component. (k) N2O emissions.
(b) Animal population (by animal (l) Total annual volumetric biogas § 98.367 Records that must be retained.
type). flow (for systems with digesters).
(c) Monthly total volatile solids (m) Average annual CH4 In addition to the information
content of excreted manure. concentration (for systems with required by § 98.3(g), you must retain
(d) Percent of manure handled in each digesters). the calibration records for all
manure management system (n) Temperature at which gas flow is monitoring equipment.
component. measured (for systems with digesters). § 98.368 Definitions.
(e) B0 value used. (o) Pressure at which gas flow is
(f) Methane conversion factor used. measured (for systems with digesters). All terms used in this subpart have
(g) Average animal mass (for each (p) Destruction efficiency used (for the same meaning given in the Clean Air
type of animal). systems with digesters). Act and subpart A of this part.
TABLE JJ–1 OF SUBPART JJ—WASTE CHARACTERISTICS DATA

Maximum
Manure ex-
Animal methane
cretion rate
group typ- generation
Animal group (kg/day/
ical animal potential, Bo
1000 kg ani-
mass (kg) (m3 CH4/kg
mal mass) VS added)
Dairy Cows .............................................................................................................................................. 604 80.34 0.24

Dairy Heifers ............................................................................................................................................ 476 85 0.17
Feedlot Steers ......................................................................................................................................... 420 51.2 0.33
Feedlot Heifers ........................................................................................................................................ 420 51.2 0.33
Market Swine <60 lbs. ............................................................................................................................. 16 106 0.48
Market Swine 60–119 lbs. ....................................................................................................................... 41 63.4 0.48
Market Swine 120–179 lbs. ..................................................................................................................... 68 63.4 0.48
Market Swine >180 lbs. ........................................................................................................................... 91 63.4 0.48
Breeding Swine ........................................................................................................................................ 198 31.8 0.48
Feedlot Sheep ......................................................................................................................................... 25 40 0.36
Goats ....................................................................................................................................................... 64 41 0.17
Horses ...................................................................................................................................................... 450 51 0.33
Hens >/= 1 yr ........................................................................................................................................... 1.8 60.5 0.39
Pullets ...................................................................................................................................................... 1.8 45.6 0.39
Other Chickens ........................................................................................................................................ 1.8 60.5 0.39
Broilers ..................................................................................................................................................... 0.9 80 0.36
Turkeys .................................................................................................................................................... 6.8 43.6 0.36
TABLE JJ–3 OF SUBPART JJ—COLLECTION EFFICIENCIES OF ANAEROBIC DIGESTERS

Methane
System type Cover type collection
efficiency
Covered anaerobic lagoon ......................................................... Bank to bank, impermeable ....................................................... 0.975

(biogas capture) .......................................................................... Modular, impermeable ................................................................ 0.70
Complete mix, fixed film, or plug flow digester .......................... Enclosed Vessel ......................................................................... 0.99
TABLE JJ–4 OF SUBPART JJ—NI- TABLE JJ–4 OF SUBPART JJ—NI- TABLE JJ–4 OF SUBPART JJ—NI-
TROUS OXIDE EMISSION FACTORS TROUS OXIDE EMISSION FACTORS TROUS OXIDE EMISSION FACTORS
(kg N2O-N/kg Kjdl N) (kg N2O-N/kg Kjdl N)—Continued (kg N2O-N/kg Kjdl N)—Continued
N2O emis- N2O emis- N2O emis-
Waste management system Waste management system Waste management system
sion factor sion factor sion factor
Aerobic Treatment (forced aer- Digester .................................... 0 Manure Composting (in vessel) 0.006
ation) ..................................... 0.005 Uncovered Anaerobic Lagoon .. 0 Manure Composting (intensive) 0.1
Aerobic Treatment (natural aer- Cattle Deep Bed (active mix) ... 0.07 Manure Composting (passive) 0.01
ation) ..................................... 0.01 Cattle Deep Bed (no mix) ......... 0.01 Manure Composting (static) ..... 0.006
EP10AP09.163</GPH>
TABLE JJ–4 OF SUBPART JJ—NI- any U.S. coal mining company, combustion or oxidation of coal
TROUS OXIDE EMISSION FACTORS wholesale coal dealer, retail coal dealer, supplied during the calendar year.
(kg N2O-N/kg Kjdl N)—Continued or other organization that imports coal
into the U.S. ‘‘Importer’’ includes the § 98.373 Calculating GHG emissions.
N 2O emis- person primarily liable for the payment (a) For coal mines producing 100,000
Waste management system sion factor of any duties on the merchandise or an short tons of coal or more annually, the
authorized agent acting on his or her estimate of CO2 emissions shall be
Deep Pit .................................... 0.002 behalf.
Dry Lot ...................................... 0.02 calculated using either Calculation
Liquid/Slurry .............................. 0.005 (d) Coal exporter has the same Methodology 1 or Calculation
Poultry with bedding ................. 0.001 meaning given in § 98.6 and includes Methodology 2 of this subpart.
Poultry without bedding ............ 0.001 any U.S. coal mining company,
Solid Storage ............................ 0.005 wholesale coal dealer, retail coal dealer, (b) For coal mines producing less than
100,000 short tons of coal annually, and
or other organization that exports coal
for coal exporters, coal importers, and
Subpart KK—Supplies of Coal from the U.S.
waste coal reclaimers; CO2 emissions
§ 98.370 Definition of the source category. (e) Waste coal reclaimer means any shall be calculated using either
U.S. facility that reclaims or recovers Calculation Methodology 1, 2, or 3 of
(a) This source category comprises
waste coal from waste coal piles from this subpart.
coal mines, coal importers, coal
previous mining operations and sells or
exporters, and waste coal reclaimers. (c) For Calculation Methodology 1, 2,
(b) Coal mine means any active U.S. delivers to an end-user.
and 3 of this subpart, emissions of CO2
coal mine engaged in the production of § 98.371 Reporting threshold. shall be calculated using Equation KK–
coal within the U.S. during the calendar 1 of this section. The difference between
year regardless of the rank of coal Any supplier of coal who meets the
requirements of § 98.2(a)(4) must report Calculation Methodology 1, 2, and 3 of
produced, e.g., bituminous, sub-
this subpart, is the method for
bituminous, lignite, anthracite. Any coal GHG emissions.
mine categorized as an active coal mine § 98.372 GHGs to report. determining the carbon content in coal,
by MSHA is included. as specified in paragraphs (d), (e), and
(c) Coal importer has the same You must report the CO2 emissions (f) of this section:
meaning given in § 98.6 and includes that would result from the complete
CO 2 = 44/12 Mass Carbon 0.907 (Eq. KK-1)
Where: Carbon = Annual weighted average fraction based on daily measurements and
CO2 = Annual CO2 mass emissions from the of carbon in the coal (decimal value). calculated using Equation KK–2 of this
0.907 = Conversion factor from short tons to
combustion of coal (metric tons/yr). section. For importers, exporters, and
metric tons.
44/12 = Ratio of molecular weights, CO2 to waste coal reclaimers using
carbon. (d) For coal mines using Calculation Methodology 1 of this subpart,
Mass = Quantity of coal produced from Methodology 1 of this subpart, the measurements of each shipment can be
company records (short tons/yr). annual weighted average of the mass used in place of daily measurements:
fraction of carbon in the coal shall be
n
Carbon = ∑ ( xi yi ) /S (Eq. KK-2)
i =1
Where: importers, exporters, and waste coal according to the requirements of

Carbon = Annual mass fraction of coal carbon reclaimers using Calculation § 98.374(f)(4), to the weighted annual
(dimensionless). Methodology 2 of this subpart, average GCV of the coal determined
Xi = Daily or per shipment mass fraction of measurements of each shipment can be according to Equation KK–3 of this
carbon in coal for day i measured by used in place of daily measurements. section.
ultimate analysis (decimal value). (1) Equation KK–3 shall be used to (f) For coal mines using Calculation
Yi = Amount of coal supplied on day i(short Methodology 3 of this subpart, the
determine the weighted annual average
tons) as measured.
n = Number of operating days per year. GCV of the coal, and the individual annual weighted average of the mass
S = Total coal supplied during the year (short daily or per shipment values shall be fraction of carbon in the coal shall be
tons). determined according to the monitoring calculated on the basis of daily
methodology for gross calorific values in measurements of GCV of the coal and a
(e) For coal mines using Calculation § 98.374(f). default fraction of carbon in coal from
Methodology 2 of this subpart, the (2) The statistical relationship Table KK–1 of this subpart. For
annual weighted average of the mass between GCV and carbon content shall importers, exporters, and waste coal
EP10AP09.165</MATH>
fraction of carbon in the coal shall be be established according to the reclaimers using Methodology 3 of this
calculated on the basis of daily requirements in § 98.374(f). subpart, measurements of each
measurements of the gross calorific (3) The estimated annual weighted shipment can be used in place of daily
value (GCV) of the coal and a statistical average of the mass fraction of carbon in measurements.
relationship between carbon content the coal shall be calculated by applying (1) Equation KK–3 shall be used to
EP10AP09.164</MATH>
and GCV (higher heating value). For the slope coefficient, determined determine the weighted annual average
GCV of the coal, and the individual (2) Daily or per shipment coal carbon (6) If all of the conditions specified in
daily or per shipment values shall be content shall be determined using paragraph (f)(5) of this section are met,
determined according to the monitoring ASTM D5373 (Test Methods for the weighted annual average gross
methodology for gross calorific values in Instrumental Determination of Carbon calorific value or higher heating value
§ 98.374(g). Hydrogen and Nitrogen in Laboratory (Btu/lb) calculated according to
(2) The estimated annual weighted Samples of Coal and Coke). Equation KK–3 of this section shall be
average of the mass fraction of carbon in (g) For reporters using Calculation used to determine the corresponding
the coal shall be identified from Table Methodology 2 of this subpart, the annual average coal carbon content
KK–1 of this subpart using annual carbon content shall be determined as using the correlation graph plotted
weighted GCV of the coal determined follows: according to paragraph (f)(4) of this
according to Equation KK–3 of this (1) Representative samples of coal section.
section. shall be collected daily or per shipment (h) Reporters complying with
(g) For Calculation Methodologies 2 using ASTM D4916–04, D6609–07, Calculation Methodology 3 of this
and 3 of this subpart, the weighted D6883–04, D7256/D7256M–06a, or subpart shall determine gross calorific
annual average gross calorific value D7430–08. value of the coal by collecting
(GCV) or higher heating value of the (2) Coal gross calorific value (GCV) representative daily or per shipment
coal shall be calculated using Equation shall be determined on the set of samples of coal using either ASTM
KK–3 of this section: samples collected in paragraph (f)(1) of D4916–04, D6609–07, D6883–04,
this section using ASTM D5865–07a, D7256/D7256M–06a, or D7430–08; and
n
‘‘Standard Test Method for Gross
GCV = ∑ ( zi ∗ yi ) /S (Eq. KK-3) Calorific Value of Coal and Coke to
testing using ASTM D5865–07a,
i =1
‘‘Standard Test Method for Gross
record the heat content of the coal Calorific Value of Coal and Coke to
Where: produced. record the heat content of the coal
GCV = the weighted annual average gross (3) Coal carbon content shall be produced.’’
calorific value or higher heating value of determined at a minimum once each (i) Coal exporters shall calculate
the coal (Btu/lb). month on one set of daily or per
zi = Daily or per shipment GCV or HHV of carbon content for each shipment of
coal for day i measured by proximate shipment samples collected in coal using information on the carbon
analysis (decimal value). paragraph (f)(1) of this section using content of the exported coal provided by
yi = Amount of coal supplied on day i (short ASTM D5373 (Test Methods for the source mine, according to
tons) as measured. Instrumental Determination of Carbon Calculation Methodology 1, 2, or 3 of
n = Number of operating days per year. Hydrogen and Nitrogen in Laboratory this subpart, as appropriate.
S = Total coal supplied during the year (short Samples of Coal and Coke). (j) Coal importers shall calculate
tons). (4) The individual samples for which carbon content for each shipment of
§ 98.374 Monitoring and QA/QC both carbon content and GCV were coal using Calculation Methodology 1,
requirements. determined according to paragraphs 2, or 3 of this subpart.
(a) The most current version of the (f)(2) and (f)(3) of this section (k) Waste coal reclaimers shall
NIST Handbook published by Weights respectively, shall be used to establish calculate carbon content for each
and Measures Division, National a statistical relationship between the shipment of coal using Calculation
Institute of Standards and Technology heat content and the carbon content of Methodology 1, 2, or 3 of this subpart.
shall be used as the standard practice the coal produced. The owner or (l) Each owner or operator using
for all coal weighing. operator shall statistically plot the mechanical coal sampling systems shall
(b) For all coal mines, the quantity of correlation of Btu/lb of coal vs. percent perform quality assurance and quality
coal shall be determined as the total carbon (as a decimal value), where the control according to ASTM D4702–07
mass of coal in short tons sold and x-axis is Btu/lb coal and the y-axis is and ASTM D6518–07.
removed from the facility during the percent carbon (as decimal value), then
fit a line to the data points, then § 98.375 Procedures for estimating
calendar year. missing data.
(c) For coal importers, the quantity of calculate the slope and the coefficient of
coal shall be determined as the total determination, and the R-square (R2) of (a) A complete record of all measured
mass of coal in short tons imported into that line using the Btu/lb and percent parameters used in the GHG emissions
the U.S. during the calendar year, as carbon. calculations is required. Therefore,
reported to U.S. Customs. (5) Calculation Methodology 2 of this whenever a quality-assured value of a
(d) For coal exporters, the quantity of subpart can be used only if all of the required parameter is unavailable, a
coal shall be determined as the total following four conditions are met: substitute data value for the missing
mass of coal in short tons sold and (i) At least 12 samples per reporting parameter shall be used in the
exported from the U.S., as reported to year from 12 different months of data calculations.
U.S. Customs. must be used to construct the (b) Whenever a quality-assured value
(e) For waste coal reclaimers, the correlation graph. for coal production during any time
quantity of coal shall be determined as (ii) The correlation graph must be period is unavailable, you must use the
the total mass of coal in short tons sold constructed using all paired data points average of the parameter values
for use as reported to state agencies. from the first reporting year and all recorded immediately before and after
(f) For reporters using Calculation subsequent reporting years. the missing data period in the
Methodology 1 of this subpart, the (iii) There must be a linear calculations.
carbon content shall be determined as relationship between percent carbon (c) Facilities using Calculation
follows: and Btu/lb of coal. Methodology 1 of this subpart shall
(1) Representative coal samples shall (iv) For the second and subsequent develop the statistical relationship
be collected daily or per shipment using years, R-square (R2) must be greater than between GCV and carbon content
ASTM D4916–04, D6609–07, D6883–04, or equal to 0.90. This R-square according to § 98.274(e), and use this
D7256/D7256M–06a, or D7430–08 from requirement does not apply during the statistical relationship to estimate daily
EP10AP09.166</MATH>
coal loaded on the conveyor belt. first reporting year. carbon content for any day for which
measured carbon content is not (ii) Slope of the correlation line. coal per shipment measured by
available. (iii) The R-squared (R2) value of the proximate analysis and amount of coal
(d) Facilities, importers and exporters correlation. supplied per shipment.
using Calculation Methodology 2 or 3 of (6) If Calculation Methodology 3 of
this subpart shall estimate the missing this subpart was used to determine CO2 § 98.377 Records that must be retained.
GCV values based on a weighted average mass emissions, you must report GCV in In addition to the records required by
value for the previous seven days. coal per shipment measured by § 98.3(g), you must retain the following
(e) Estimates of missing data shall be proximate analysis and amount of coal information:
documented and records maintained supplied per shipment. (a) A complete record of all measured
showing the calculations. (d) Coal exporters shall report the parameters used in the reporting of fuel
following information at the corporate quantities, including all sample results
§ 98.376 Data reporting requirements. level: and documentation to support
In addition to the information (1) The total annual quantity in tons quantities that are reported under this
required by § 98.3(c), each annual report of coal exported from the U.S. by rank part.
must contain the following information. and by coal producing company and (b) Records documenting all
(a) Each coal mine owner or operator mine. calculations of missing data.
shall report the following information (2) Annual CO2 emissions. (c) Calculations and worksheets used
for each coal mine: (3) The annual weighted carbon to estimate the CO2 emissions.
(1) The name and MSHA ID number content of the coal as calculated (d) Calibration records of any
of the mine. according to § 98.373. instruments used on site and calibration
(2) The name of the operating (4) If Calculation Methodology 1 of records of scales or other equipment
company. this subpart was used to determine CO2 used to weigh coal.
(3) Annual CO2 emissions. mass emissions, you must report mass
(4) By rank, the total annual quantity § 98.378 Definitions.
fraction of carbon in coal per shipment
in tons of coal produced. measured by ultimate analysis and All terms used in this subpart have
(5) The annual weighted carbon amount of coal supplied per shipment. the same meaning given in the Clean Air
content of the coal as calculated (5) If Calculation Methodology 2 of Act and subpart A of this part.
according to § 98.373. this subpart was used to determine CO2
(6) If Calculation Methodology 1 of mass emissions, you must report: TABLE KK–1 OF SUBPART KK—DE-
this subpart was used to determine CO2 (i) All of the data used to construct FAULT CARBON CONTENT OF COAL
mass emissions, you must report daily the carbon vs. Btu/lb correlation graph. FOR METHOD 3 (CO2 lbs/MMBtu1)
mass fraction of carbon in coal (ii) Slope of the correlation line.
measured by ultimate analysis and daily (iii) The R-squared (R2) value of the Mass fraction
amount of coal supplied. correlation. Weighted annual average of carbon in
(7) If Calculation Methodology 2 of GCV of coal Btu/lb1 coal
(6) If Calculation Methodology 3 of (decimal)
this subpart was used to determine CO2 this subpart was used to determine CO2
mass emissions, you must report: mass emissions, you must report GCV in 2,000 ..................................... 0.1140
(i) All of the data used to construct coal per shipment measured by 2,250 ..................................... 0.1283
the carbon vs. Btu/lb correlation graph. proximate analysis and amount of coal 2,500 ..................................... 0.1425
(ii) Slope of the correlation line. supplied per shipment. 2,750 ..................................... 0.1568
(iii) The R-squared (R2) value of the (e) Waste coal reclaimers shall report 3,000 ..................................... 0.1710
correlation. the following information for each 3,250 ..................................... 0.1853
(8) If Calculation Methodology 3 of 3,500 ..................................... 0.1995
reclamation site:
this subpart was used to determine CO2 3,750 ..................................... 0.2138
(1) By rank, the total annual quantity 4,000 ..................................... 0.2280
mass emissions, you must report daily in tons of waste coal produced. 4,250 ..................................... 0.2423
GCV of coal measured by proximate (2) Mine and state of origin if waste 4,500 ..................................... 0.2565
analysis and daily amount of coal coal is reclaimed from mines that are no 4,750 ..................................... 0.2708
supplied. longer operating. 5,000 ..................................... 0.2850
(b) Coal importers shall report the (3) Annual CO2 emissions. 5,250 ..................................... 0.2993
following information at the corporate (4) The annual weighted carbon 5,500 ..................................... 0.3135
level: content of the coal as calculated 5,750 ..................................... 0.3278
(1) The total annual quantity in tons according to § 98.373. 6,000 ..................................... 0.3420
of coal imported into the U.S. by the (5) If Calculation Methodology 1 of 6,250 ..................................... 0.3563
6,500 ..................................... 0.3705
importer, by rank, and country of origin. this subpart was used to determine CO2 6,750 ..................................... 0.3848
(2) Annual CO2 emissions. mass emissions, you must report mass 7,000 ..................................... 0.3990
(3) The annual weighted carbon fraction of carbon in coal per shipment 7,250 ..................................... 0.4133
content of the coal as calculated measured by ultimate analysis and 7,500 ..................................... 0.4275
according to § 98.373. amount of coal supplied per shipment. 7,750 ..................................... 0.4418
(4) If Calculation Methodology 1 of (6) If Calculation Methodology 2 of 8,000 ..................................... 0.4560
this subpart was used to determine CO2 this subpart was used to determine CO2 8,250 ..................................... 0.4703
mass emissions, you must report mass mass emissions, you must report: 8,500 ..................................... 0.4845
fraction of carbon in coal per shipment (i) All of the data used to construct 8,750 ..................................... 0.4988
measured by ultimate analysis and 9,000 ..................................... 0.5130
the carbon vs. Btu/lb correlation graph.
9,250 ..................................... 0.5273
amount of coal supplied per shipment. (ii) Slope of the correlation line. 9,500 ..................................... 0.5415
(5) If Calculation Methodology 2 of (iii) The R-squre (R 2) value of the 9,750 ..................................... 0.5558
this subpart was used to determine CO2 correlation. 10,000 ................................... 0.5700
mass emissions, you must report: (7) If Calculation Methodology 3 of 10,250 ................................... 0.5843
(i) All of the data used to construct this subpart was used to determine CO2 10,500 ................................... 0.5985
the carbon vs. Btu/lb correlation graph. mass emissions, you must report GCV in 10,750 ................................... 0.6128
TABLE KK–1 OF SUBPART KK—DE- TABLE KK–1 OF SUBPART KK—DE- fuels such as gasoline and diesel using
FAULT CARBON CONTENT OF COAL FAULT CARBON CONTENT OF COAL the Fischer-Tropsch process or an
FOR METHOD 3 (CO2 lbs/ FOR METHOD 3 (CO2 lbs/ alternative process, involving
MMBtu1)—Continued MMBtu1)—Continued conversion of coal into gas and then into
liquids or conversion of coal directly
Mass fraction Mass fraction into liquids (direct liquefaction).
Weighted annual average of carbon in Weighted annual average of carbon in (b) An importer or exporter shall have
GCV of coal Btu/lb1 coal GCV of coal Btu/lb1 coal the same meaning given in § 98.6.
(decimal) (decimal)
11,000 ................................... 0.6270 15,250 ................................... 0.8693
11,250 ................................... 0.6413 15,500 ................................... 0.8835
Any supplier of coal-based liquid
11,500 ................................... 0.6555 fuels who meets the requirements of
1 Based on high heating values.
11,750 ................................... 0.6698 § 98.2(a)(4) must report GHG emissions.
12,000 ................................... 0.6840
12,250 ................................... 0.6983 Subpart LL—Suppliers of Coal-based § 98.382 GHGs to report.
12,500 ................................... 0.7125 Liquid Fuels You must report the CO2 emissions
12,750 ................................... 0.7268 that would result from the complete
13,000 ................................... 0.7410 § 98.380 Definition of the source category.
combustion or oxidation of coal-based
13,250 ................................... 0.7553 This source category consists of liquids during the calendar year.
13,500 ................................... 0.7695 producers, importers, and exporters of
13,750 ................................... 0.7838 coal-based liquids. § 98.383 Calculating GHG emissions.
14,000 ................................... 0.7980
14,250 ................................... 0.8123 (a) A producer is the owner or (a) Coal-to-liquid producers,
14,500 ................................... 0.8265 operator of a coal-to-liquids facility. A importers and exporters must calculate
14,750 ................................... 0.8408 coal-to-liquids facility is any facility CO2 emissions using Equation LL–1 of
15,000 ................................... 0.8550 engaged in coverting coal into liquid this section.
CO 2 = ∑ ( Pr oduct i ∗ EFi ) (Eq. LL-1)
Where: calculation methodologies described in (2) Calculation Methodology 2.

CO2 = Annual CO2 mass emissions from the paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section. Develop a CO2 emission factor
combustion of fuel (metric tons). The same calculation methodology must according to Equation LL–2 of this
Producti = Total annual volume (in standard be used for the entire volume of the section using direct measurement of
barrels) of a coal-based liquid fuel ‘‘i’’ product for the reporting year. density and carbon share according to
produced, imported, or exported. (1) Calculation Methodology 1. Use methods set forth in § 98.394(c) or a
EFi = CO2 emission factor (metric tons CO2
per barrel) specific to liquid fuel ‘‘i’’.
the default CO2 emission factor listed in combination of direct measurement and
column C of Table MM–1 of subpart the default factor listed in columns A or
(b) The emission factor (EF) for each MM (Suppliers of Petroleum Products) B of Table MM–1 of subpart MM that
type of coal-based liquid shall be that most closely represents the coal- most closely represents the coal-based
determined using either of the based liquid. liquid.
EF = Density Wt% (44/12) (Eq. LL-2)
Where: (2) The minimum frequency of the meter and such other records as are
EF = Emission factor of coal-based liquid measurement of quantities of coal-based normally maintained in the course of
(metric tons CO2 per barrel). liquid fuels shall be the number of sales business to document fuel flows.
Density = Density of coal-based liquid contracts executed in the reporting (2) For all estimates of CO2 mass
(metric tons per barrel). period. emissions, reporters shall maintain
Wt% = Percent of total mass that carbon
(c) All flow meters and product calculations and worksheets used to
represents in coal-based liquid.
monitors shall be calibrated prior to use calculate the emissions.
§ 98.384 Monitoring and QA/QC for reporting, using a suitable method
requirements. published by a consensus standards § 98.385 Procedures for estimating
organization (e.g., ASTM, ASME, API, missing data.
(a) Producers must measure the
NAESB, or others). Alternatively, (a) A complete record of all measured
quantity of coal-based liquid fuels using
calibration procedures specified by the parameters used in the reporting of fuel
procedures for flow meters as described
flow meter manufacturer may be used. volumes and the calculations of CO2
in subpart MM of this part.
Fuel flow meters shall be recalibrated mass emissions is required. Therefore,
(b) Importers and exporters must either annually or at the minimum whenever a quality-assured
determine the quantity of coal-based frequency specified by the measurement of the quantity of coal-
liquid fuels using sales contract manufacturer. based liquid fuels is unavailable a
EP10AP09.168</MATH>
information on the volume imported or (d) Reporters shall take the following substitute data value for the missing
exported during the reporting period. steps to ensure the quality and accuracy quantity measurement shall be
(1) The quantity of coal-based liquid of the data reported under these rules: calculated and used in the calculations.
fuels must be measured using sales (1) For all volumes of coal-based (b) For coal-to-liquids facilities, the
EP10AP09.167</MATH>
contract information. liquid fuels, reporters shall maintain last quality assured reading shall be
used. If substantial variation in the flow § 98.387 Records that must be retained. § 98.391 Reporting threshold.
rate is observed or if a quality assured Reporters shall retain copies of all Any supplier of petroleum products
measurement of quantity is unavailable reports submitted to EPA. Reporters who meets the requirements of
for any other reason, the average of the shall maintain records to support § 98.2(a)(4) must report GHG emissions.
last and the next quality assured reading volumes that are reported under this
shall be used to calculate a substitute § 98.392 GHGs to report.
part, including records documenting
measurement of quantity. any calculation of substitute measured You must report the CO2 emissions
(c) Calculation of substitute data shall data. Reporters shall also retain that would result from the complete
be documented and records maintained calculations and worksheets used to combustion or oxidation of each
showing the calculations. estimate the CO2 equivalent of the petroleum product and natural gas
volumes reported under this part. These liquid produced, used as feedstock,
§ 98.386 Data reporting requirements. imported, or exported during the
records shall be retained for five (5)
In addition to the information years similar to 40 CFR part 80 fuels calendar year. Additionally, if you are a
required by § 98.3(c), each annual report compliance reporting program. refiner, you must report CO2 emissions
must contain the following information: that would result from the complete
(a) Producers shall report the § 98.388 Definitions. combustion or oxidation of any biomass
following information for each facility: All terms used in this subpart have co-processed with petroleum feedstocks.
(1) The total annual volume of each the same meaning given in the Clean Air
coal-based liquid supplied to the Act and subpart A of this part.
economy (in standard barrels). (a) Except as provided in paragraph
Subpart MM—Suppliers of Petroleum (g) of this section, any refiner, importer,
(2) The total annual CO2 emissions in
Products or exporter shall calculate CO2
metric tons associated with each coal-
emissions from each individual
based liquid supplied to the economy, § 98.390 Definition of the source category. petroleum product and natural gas
calculated according to § 98.383(a). This source category consists of liquid using Equation MM–1 of this
(b) Importers shall report the petroleum refineries and importers and section.
following information at the corporate exporters of petroleum products.
level: (a) A petroleum refinery is any facility CO 2i = Product i EFi (Eq. MM-1)
(1) The total annual volume of each engaged in producing gasoline,
imported coal-based liquid (in standard Where:
kerosene, distillate fuel oils, residual
barrels). fuel oils, lubricants, asphalt (bitumen) CO2i = Annual potential CO2 emissions from
(2) The total annual CO2 emissions in the complete combustion or oxidation of
or other products through distillation of each petroleum product or natural gas
metric tons associated with each petroleum or through redistillation, liquid ‘‘i’’ (metric tons).
imported coal-based liquid, calculated cracking, or reforming of unfinished Producti = Total annual volume of product
according to § 98.383(a). petroleum derivatives. ‘‘i’’ produced, imported, or exported by
(c) Exporters shall report the (b) A refiner is the owner or operator the reporting party (barrels). For refiners,
following information at the corporate of a petroleum refinery. this volume only includes products ex
level: (c) Importer has the same meaning refinery gate.
(1) The total annual volume of each given in § 98.6 and includes any blender EFi = Product-specific CO2 emission factor
exported coal-based liquid (in standard or refiner of refined or semi-refined (metric tons CO2 per barrel).
barrels). petroleum products. (b) Except as provided in paragraph
(2) The total annual CO2 emissions in (d) Exporter has the same meaning (g) of this secton, any refiner shall
metric tons associated with each given in § 98.6 and includes any blender calculate CO2 emissions from each non-
exported coal-based liquid, calculated or refiner of refined or semi-refined crude feedstock using Equation MM–2
according to § 98.383(a). petroleum products. of this section.
CO 2j = Feedstock j EFj (Eq. MM-2)
Where: Feedstockj = Total annual volume of a EFj = Feedstock-specific CO2 emission factor
CO2j = Annual potential CO2 emissions from petroleum product or natural gas liquid (metric tons CO2 per barrel).
the complete combustion or oxidation of ‘‘j’’ that enters the refinery as a feedstock
to be further refined or otherwise used (c) Refiners shall calculate CO2
each non-crude feedstock ‘‘j’’ (metric emissions from all biomass co-processed
on site (barrels). Any waste feedstock
tons). (see definitions) that enters the refinery with petroleum feedstocks using
must also be included. Equation MM–3 of this section.
EP10AP09.171</MATH>
CO 2m = Biomass m EFm (Eq. MM-3)
Where: Biomassm = Total annual volume of a specific EFm = Biomass-specific CO2 emission factor
type of biomass that enters the refinery (metric tons CO2 per barrel).
EP10AP09.170</MATH>
CO2m = Annual potential CO2 emissions from

to be co-processed with petroleum
the complete combustion or oxidation of (d) Refiners shall calculate total CO2
feedstocks to produce a petroleum
biomass ‘‘m’’ (metric tons). emissions from all products using
product reported under paragraph (a) of
this section (barrels). Equation MM–4 of this section.
EP10AP09.169</MATH>
CO 2r = ∑ ( CO 2i ) −∑ ( CO 2j ) −∑ ( CO 2m ) (Eq. MM-4)
Where: petroleum products and natural gas either of the calculation methodologies
CO2r = Total annual potential CO2 emissions liquids imported or exported, described in paragraphs (f)(1) or (f)(2) of
from the complete combustion or respectively, using Equations MM–1 this section. The same calculation
oxidation of all petroleum products and and MM–5 of this section. methodology must be used for the entire
natural gas liquids (ex refinery gate) volume of the product for the reporting
CO 2 x = ∑ ( CO 2i )
minus non-crude feedstocks and any
biomass to be co-processed with (Eq. MM-5) year.
petroleum feedstocks. Where: (1) Calculation Methodology 1. Use
CO2i = Annual potential CO2 emissions from the appropriate default CO2 emission
CO2i = Annual potential CO2 emissions from
the complete combustion or oxidation of factors listed in column C of Tables
each petroleum product or natural gas the complete combustion or oxidation of
each petroleum product or natural gas MM–1 and MM–2 of this subpart.
liquid ‘‘i’’ (metric tons).
CO2j = Annual potential CO2 emissions from liquid ‘‘i’’ (metric tons). (2) Calculation Methodology 2.
the complete combustion or oxidation of CO2x = Total annual potential CO2 emissions Develop emission factors according to
each non-crude feedstock ‘‘j’’ (metric from the complete combustion or Equation MM–6 of this section using
tons). oxidation of all petroleum products and direct measurements of density and
CO2m = Annual potential CO2 emissions from natural gas liquids.
carbon share according to methods set
the complete combustion or oxidation of (f) Except as provided in paragraph (g) forth in § 98.394(c) or a combination of
biomass ‘‘m’’ (metric tons). of this section, the emission factor (EF) direct measurements and default factors
(e) Importers and exporters shall for each petroleum product and natural listed in columns A and B of Tables
calculate total CO2 emissions from all gas liquid shall be determined using MM–1 and MM–2 of this subpart.
EF = Density Wt % (44/12) (Eq. MM-6)
Where: (g) In the event that some portion of paragraph (g)(1) or (2) of this section, as
EF = Emission factor of petroleum or natural a petroleum product or feedstock is appropriate.
gas product or non-crude feedstock biomass-based and was not derived by
(metric tons CO2 per barrel). (1) A reporting party using
co-processing biomass and petroleum Calculation Methodology 1 of this
Density = Density of petroleum product or
natural gas liquid or non-crude feedstock feedstocks together (i.e., the petroleum subpart to determine the emission factor
(metric tons per barrel). product or feedstock was produced by of a petroleum product shall calculate
Wt% = Percent of total mass that carbon blending a petroleum-based product the CO2 emissions associated with that
represents in petroleum product or with a biomass-based product), the product using Equation MM–7 of this
natural gas liquid or non-crude reporting party shall calculate emissions
feedstock. section in place of Equation MM–1 of
44/12 = Conversion factor for carbon to
for the petroleum product or feedstock this section.
carbon dioxide. according to one of the methods in
CO 2i = Product i EFi %Voli (Eq. MM-7)
Where: For refiners, this volume only includes (2) A refinery using Calculation
CO2i = Annual potential CO2 emissions from products ex refinery gate. Methodology 1 of this subpart to
the complete combustion or oxidation of EFi = Petroleum product-specific CO2 determine the emission factor of a non-
EP10AP09.176</MATH>
petroleum product ‘‘i’’ (metric tons). emission factor (metric tons CO2 per crude petroleum feedstock shall
Producti = Total annual volume of petroleum barrel) from MM–1. calculate the CO2 emissions associated
product ‘‘i’’ produced, imported, or %Voli = Percent volume of product ‘‘i’’ that with that feedstock using Equation MM–
exported by the reporting party (barrels). is petroleum-based. 8 in place of Equation MM–2 of this
section.
EP10AP09.175</MATH>
CO 2 j = Feedstock j EFj %Vol j (Eq. MM-8)

EP10AP09.174</MATH>
Where: refined or otherwise used on site (3) A reporter using Calculation

CO2j = Annual potential CO2 emissions from (barrels). Methodology 2 of this subpart to
the complete combustion or oxidation of EFj = Non-crude petroleum feedstock-specific determine the emission factor of a
each non-crude feedstock ‘‘j’’ (metric CO2 emission factor (metric tons CO2 per petroleum product must calculate the
EP10AP09.173</MATH>
tons). barrel). CO2 emissions associated with that

Feedstockj = Total annual volume of a %Volj = Percent volume of feedstock ‘‘j’’ that product using Equation MM–9 of this
petroleum product ‘‘j’’ that enters the is petroleum-based. section in place of Equation MM–1 of
refinery as a feedstock to be further this section.
EP10AP09.172</MATH>
CO 2i = ( Product i EFi ) − ( Product i EFm %Volm ) (Eq. MM-9)
Where: EFi = Product-specific CO2 emission factor (4) A refiner using Calculation
CO2i = Annual potential CO2 emissions from (metric tons CO2 per barrel). Methodology 2 of this subpart to
the complete combustion or oxidation of EFm = Default CO2 emission factor from Table determine the emission factor of a non-
product ‘‘i’’ (metric tons). MM–3 that most closely represents the crude petroleum feedstock must
Producti = Total annual volume of petroleum component of product ‘‘i’’ that is
product ‘‘i’’ produced, imported, or
calculate the CO2 emissions associated
biomass-based. with that feedstock using Equation MM–
exported by the reporting party (barrels). %Volm = Percent volume of petroleum
For refiners, this volume only includes 10 in place of Equation MM–2 of this
product ‘‘i’’ that is biomass-based.
products ex refinery gate. section.
CO 2 j = ( Feedstock j EFj ) − ( Feedstock i EFm % Volm ) ( Eq. MM-10)
Where: (ii) API MPMS 2.2: A Manual of reporting party is unable to reconcile
CO2j = Annual potential CO2 emissions from Petroleum Measurement Standards the readings, the higher of the two
the complete combustion or oxidation of (1995) volume values shall be used for
non-crude feedstock ‘‘j’’ (metric tons). (iii) API–653: Tank Inspection, emission calculation purposes.
Feedstockj = Total annual volume of non- Repair, Alteration and Reconstruction, (b) For pipeline imported and
crude feedstock ‘‘j’’ that enters the 3rd edition (2008) exported refined and semi-refined
refinery as a feedstock to be further (b) All flow meters and tank gauges products, the last valid volume reading
refined or otherwise used on site shall be calibrated prior to use for
(barrels). Any waste feedstock (see
based on the company’s established
definitions) that enters the refinery must
reporting, using a suitable method procedures for purposes of product
also be included. published by a consensus standards tracking and billing shall be used. If the
EFj = Feedstock-specific CO2 emission factor organization (e.g., ASTM, ASME, API, pipeline experiences substantial
(metric tons CO2 per barrel). or NAESB). Alternatively, calibration variations in flow rate, the average of
EFm = Default CO2 emission factor from Table procedures specified by the flow meter the last valid volume reading and the
MM–3 of subpart MM that most closely manufacturer may be used. Product flow next valid volume reading shall be used
represents the component of product ‘‘i’’ meters and tank gauges shall be for emission calculation purposes.
that is biomass-based. recalibrated either annually or at the (c) For petroleum refineries, the last
%Volm = Percent volume of non-crude minimum frequency specified by the valid volume reading based on the
feedstock ‘‘j’’ that is biomass-based. manufacturer, whichever is more facility’s established procedures for
(h) Refiners shall use the most frequent. purposes of product tracking and billing
appropriate default CO2 emission factor (c) For Calculation Methodology 2 of shall be used. If substantial variation in
(EFm) for biomass in Table MM–3 to this subpart, samples of each petroleum the flow rate is observed, the average of
calculate CO2 emissions in paragraph (c) product and natural gas liquid shall be the last and the next valid volume
of this section. taken each month for the reporting year. reading shall be used for emission
The composite sample shall be tested at calculation purposes.
§ 98.394 Monitoring and QA/QC the end of the reporting year using
requirements. ASTM D1298 (2003), ASTM D1657–02 § 98.396 Data reporting requirements.
(a) The quantity of petroleum (2007), ASTM D4052–96 (2002)el, In addition to the information
products, natural gas liquids, biomass, ASTM D5002–99 (2005), or ASTM required by § 98.3(c), the following
and all feedstocks shall be determined D5004–89 (2004)el for density, as requirements apply.
using either a flow meter or tank gauge, appropriate, and ASTM D5291 (2005) or (a) Refiners shall report the following
depending on the reporters existing ASTM D6729–(2004)el for carbon share, information for each facility:
equipment and preferences. as appropriate (see Technical Support (1) CO2 emissions in metric tons for
(1) For flow meters any one of the Document). Reporters must sample each petroleum product and natural gas
following test methods can be used to seasonal gasoline each month of the liquid (ex refinery gate), calculated
determine quantity: season and then test the composite according to § 98.393(a) or (g).
sample at the end of the season. (2) CO2 emissions in metric tons for
(i) Ultra-sonic flow meter: AGA
each petroleum product or natural gas
Report No. 9 (2007) § 98.395 Procedures for estimating liquid that enters the refinery annually
(ii) Turbine meters: American missing data. as a feedstock to be further refined or
National Standards Institute, ANSI/ Whenever a metered or quality- otherwise used on site, calculated
ASME MFC–4M–1986 assured value of the quantity of according to § 98.393(b) or (g).
(iii) Orifice meters: American petroleum products, natural gas liquids, (3) CO2 emissions in metric tons from
National Standards Institute, AINSI/API biomass, or feedstocks during any each type of biomass feedstock co-
2530 (also called AGA–3) (1991) period is unavailable, a substitute data processed with petroleum feedstocks,
(iv) Coriolis meters: ASME MFC–11 value for the missing quantity calculated according to § 98.393(c).
(2006) measurement shall be used in the (4) The total sum of CO2 emissions
EP10AP09.178</MATH>
(2) For tank gauges any one of the calculations contained in § 98.393. from all products, calculated according
following test methods can be used to (a) For marine-imported and exported to § 98.393(d).
determine quantity: refined and semi-refined products, the (5) The total volume of each
(i) API–2550: Measurements and reporting party shall attempt to petroleum product and natural gas
Calibration of Petroleum Storage Tanks reconcile any differences between ship liquid associated with the CO2
EP10AP09.177</MATH>
(1965) and shore volume readings. If the emissions reported in paragraphs (a)(1)
and (2) of this section, seperately, and of this section as well as the volume of or natural gas liquid for which CO2
the volume of the biomass-based the biomass-based component of each emissions were calculated using
component of each petroleum product petroleum product reported in this Calculation Methodology 2 of this
reported in this paragraph that was paragraph that was produced by subpart, along with the selected method
produced by blending a petroleum- blending a petroleum-based product from § 98.394(c) and the calculated EF.
based product with a biomass-based with a biomass-based product. If you (5) The total volume of each distillate
product. If a determination cannot be cannot determine whether the material fuel oil product reported in paragraph
made whether the material is a is a petroleum product or a natural gas (c)(1) of this section that contains less
petroleum product or a natural gas liquid, you shall report it as a petroleum than 15 ppm sulfur content and is free
liquid, it shall be reported as a product. from marker solvent yellow 124 and dye
petroleum product. (4) The measured density and/or mass solvent red 164.
(6) The total volume of any biomass carbon share for any imported
co-processed with a petroleum product petroleum product or natural gas liquid § 98.397 Records that must be retained.
associated with the CO2 emissions for which CO2 emissions were (a) Any reporter described in § 98.391
reported in paragraph (a)(3) of this calculated using Calculation shall retain copies of all reports
section. Methodology 2 of this subpart, along submitted to EPA under § 98.396. In
(7) The measured density and/or mass with the selected method from addition, any reporter under this
carbon share for any petroleum product § 98.394(c) and the calculated EF. subpart shall maintain sufficient records
or natural gas liquid for which CO2 (5) The total volume of each distillate to support information contained in
emissions were calculated using fuel oil product reported in paragraph those reports, including but not limited
Calculation Methodology 2 of this (b)(1) of this section that contains less to information on the characteristics of
subpart, along with the selected method than 15 ppm sulfur content and is free their feedstocks and products.
from § 98.394(c) and the calculated EF. from marker solvent yellow 124 and dye (b) Reporters shall maintain records to
(8) The total volume of each distillate solvent red 164. support volumes that are reported under
fuel oil product or feedstock reported in (c) In addition to the information this part, including records
paragraph (a)(5) of this section that required by § 98.3(c), each exporter shall documenting any estimations of missing
contains less than 15 ppm sulfur report all of the following information at metered data. For all volumes of
content and is free from marker solvent the corporate level: petroleum products, natural gas liquids,
yellow 124 and dye solvent red 164. (1) CO2 emissions in metric tons for
biomass, and feedstocks, reporters shall
(9) All of the following information each exported petroleum product and
maintain meter and other records
for all crude oil feedstocks used at the natural gas liquid, calculated according
normally maintained in the course of
refinery: to § 98.393(a).
(2) Total sum of CO2 emissions, business to document product and
(i) Batch volume (in standard barrels). feedstock flows.
(ii) API gravity of the batch. calculated according to § 98.393(e).
(iii) Sulfur content of the batch. (3) The total volume of each exported (c) Reporters shall also retain
(iv) Country of origin of the batch. petroleum product and natural gas laboratory reports, calculations and
(b) In addition to the information liquid associated with the CO2 worksheets used to estimate the CO2
required by § 98.3(c), each importer emissions reported in paragraph (c)(1) of emissions of the volumes reported
shall report all of the following this section as well as the volume of the under this part.
information at the corporate level: biomass-based component of each (d) Estimates of missing data shall be
(1) CO2 emissions in metric tons for petroleum product reported in this documented and records maintained
each imported petroleum product and paragraph that was produced by showing the calculations.
natural gas liquid, calculated according blending a petroleum-based product (e) Reporters described in this subpart
to § 98.393(a). with a biomass-based product. If you shall also retain all records described in
(2) Total sum of CO2 emissions, cannot determine whether the material § 98.3(g).
calculated according to § 98.393(e). is a petroleum product or a natural gas
(3) The total volume of each imported liquid, you shall report it as a petroleum § 98.398 Definitions.
petroleum product and natural gas product. All terms used in this subpart have
liquid associated with the CO2 (4) The measured density and/or mass the same meaning given in the Clean Air
emissions reported in paragraph (b)(1) carbon share for any petroleum product Act and subpart A of this part.
TABLE MM–1 OF SUBPART MM—DEFAULT CO2 FACTORS FOR PETROLEUM PRODUCTS 1, 2

Column C:
emission
Column A: factor
Column B:
density (metric tons
Refined and semi-refined petroleum products carbon share
(metric tons/ CO2/bbl)
(% of mass)
bbl) [Column A *
Column B/100
* 44/12]
Motor Gasoline 3
Conventional—Summer ........................................................................................................ 0.12 86.96 0.38

Conventional—Winter ........................................................................................................... 0.12 86.96 0.37
Reformulated—Summer ....................................................................................................... 0.12 86.60 0.37
Reformulated—Winter .......................................................................................................... 0.12 86.60 0.37
Finished Aviation Gasoline ................................................................................................... 0.11 85.00 0.35
TABLE MM–1 OF SUBPART MM—DEFAULT CO2 FACTORS FOR PETROLEUM PRODUCTS 1, 2—Continued
Column C:
emission
Column A: factor
Column B:
density (metric tons
Refined and semi-refined petroleum products carbon share
(metric tons/ CO2/bbl)
(% of mass)
bbl) [Column A *
Column B/100
* 44/12]
Blendstocks
RBOB .................................................................................................................................... 0.12 86.60 0.38

CBOB .................................................................................................................................... 0.12 85.60 0.37
Others ................................................................................................................................... 0.11 84.00 0.34
Oxygenates
Methanol ............................................................................................................................... 0.13 37.50 0.17

GTBA .................................................................................................................................... 0.12 64.90 0.29
t-butanol ................................................................................................................................ 0.12 64.90 0.29
MTBE .................................................................................................................................... 0.12 68.20 0.29
ETBE .................................................................................................................................... 0.12 70.50 0.30
TAME .................................................................................................................................... 0.12 70.50 0.31
DIPE ..................................................................................................................................... 0.12 70.60 0.30
Kerosene-Type Jet Fuel ....................................................................................................... 0.13 86.30 0.41
Naptha-Type Jet Fuel ........................................................................................................... 0.12 85.80 0.39
Kerosene .............................................................................................................................. 0.13 86.01 0.41
Distillate Fuel Oil
Diesel No. 1 .......................................................................................................................... 0.13 86.40 0.43

Diesel No. 2 .......................................................................................................................... 0.13 86.34 0.43
Diesel No. 4 .......................................................................................................................... 0.15 86.47 0.46
Fuel Oil No. 1 ....................................................................................................................... 0.13 86.40 0.43
Fuel Oil No. 2 ....................................................................................................................... 0.13 86.34 0.43
Fuel Oil No. 4 ....................................................................................................................... 0.15 86.47 0.46
Residual Fuel Oil No. 5 (Navy Special) ............................................................................... 0.14 85.81 0.43
Residual Fuel Oil No. 6 (a.k.a. Bunker C) ........................................................................... 0.16 85.68 0.49
Petrochemical Feedstocks
Naphthas (< 401 °F) ............................................................................................................. 0.12 84.11 0.36

Other Oils (> 401 °F) ............................................................................................................ 0.13 86.34 0.43
Special Naphthas ................................................................................................................. 0.12 84.76 0.38
Lubricants ............................................................................................................................. 0.14 85.80 0.45
Waxes ................................................................................................................................... 0.13 85.29 0.40
Petroleum Coke .................................................................................................................... 0.07 92.28 0.23
Asphalt and Road Oil ........................................................................................................... 0.16 83.47 0.50
Still Gas ................................................................................................................................ 0.07 24.40 0.06
Ethane .................................................................................................................................. 0.06 80.00 0.17
Ethylene ................................................................................................................................ 0.09 85.71 0.28
Propane ................................................................................................................................ 0.08 81.80 0.24
Propylene .............................................................................................................................. 0.08 85.71 0.26
Butane .................................................................................................................................. 0.09 82.80 0.28
Butylene ................................................................................................................................ 0.11 85.71 0.35
Isobutane .............................................................................................................................. 0.09 82.80 0.27
Isobutylene ........................................................................................................................... 0.09 85.71 0.29
Pentanes Plus ...................................................................................................................... 0.11 83.70 0.32
Miscellaneous Products ........................................................................................................ 0.14 85.49 0.43
Unfinished Oils ..................................................................................................................... 0.14 85.49 0.43
Naphthas .............................................................................................................................. 0.12 85.70 0.37
Kerosenes ............................................................................................................................. 0.13 85.80 0.41
Heavy Gas Oils .................................................................................................................... 0.15 85.80 0.46
Residuum .............................................................................................................................. 0.16 85.70 0.51
Waste Feedstocks ................................................................................................................ 0.14 85.70 0.45
1 In the case of transportation fuels blended with some portion of biomass-based fuel, the carbon share in Table MM–1 represents only the pe-
troleum-based components.
2 Products that are derived entirely from biomass should not be reported, but products that were derived from both biomass and a petroleum
product (i.e., co-processed) should be reported as the petroleum product that it most closely represents.
TABLE MM–2 OF SUBPART MM—DEFAULT CO2 FACTORS FOR NATURAL GAS LIQUIDS
Column C:
computed
emission
Column A: Column B: factor
Natural gas liquids density carbon share (tonnes CO2/
tonnes/barrel (% of mass) bbl)
[Column A *
Column B/100
* 44/12]
C2+ .............................................................................................................................................. 0.08 81.79 0.24

C4+ .............................................................................................................................................. 0.10 83.15 0.30
C5+ .............................................................................................................................................. 0.11 83.70 0.32
C6+ .............................................................................................................................................. 0.11 84.04 0.34
TABLE MM–3 OF SUBPART MM—DEFAULT CO2 FACTORS FOR BIOMASS-BASED FUEL AND BIOMASS FEEDSTOCK
Column A:
emission
Biomass products and feedstock factor
(tonnes CO2/
bbl)
Ethanol (100%) .................................................................................................................................................................................... 0.23

Biodiesel (100%, methyl ester) ............................................................................................................................................................ 0.40
Rendered Animal Fat ........................................................................................................................................................................... 0.37
Vegetable Oil ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 0.41
Subpart NN—Suppliers of Natural Gas operating companies by State public § 98.403 Calculating GHG emissions.
and Natural Gas Liquids utility commissions or that operate as (a) For each type of fuel or product
independent municipally-owned reported under this part, calculate the
§ 98.400 Definition of the source category. distribution systems.
This supplier category consists of estimated CO2 equivalent emissions
natural gas processing plants and local § 98.401 Reporting threshold. using either of Calculation Methodology
natural gas distribution companies. Any supplier of natural gas and 1 or 2 of this subpart:
(a) Natural Gas Processing Plants are natural gas liquids that meets the (1) Calculation Methodology 1.
installations designed to separate and requirements of § 98.2(a)(4) must report Estimate CO2 emissions using Equation
recover natural gas liquids (NGLs) or GHG emissions. NN–1. For Equation NN–1, use the
other gases and liquids from a stream of default values for higher heating values
produced natural gas through the § 98.402 GHGs to report. and CO2 emission factors in Table NN–
processes of condensation, absorption, (a) Natural gas processing plants must 1 to this subpart. Alternatively, reporter-
adsorption, refrigeration, or other report the CO2 emissions that would specific higher heating values and CO2
methods and to control the quality of result from the complete combustion or emission factors may be used, provided
natural gas marketed. This does not oxidation of the annual quantity of they are developed using methods
include field gathering and boosting propane, butane, ethane, isobutane and outlined in § 98.404. For Equation NN–
stations. bulk NGLs sold or delivered for use off 2 of this section, use the default values
(b) Local Distribution Companies are site. for the CO2 emission factors found in
companies that own or operate (b) Local distribution companies must Table NN–2 of this subpart.
distribution pipelines, not interstate report the CO2 emissions that would Alternatively, reporter-specific CO2
pipelines or intrastate pipelines, that result from the complete combustion or emission factors may be used, provided
physically deliver natural gas to end oxidation of the annual volumes of they are developed using methods
users and that are regulated as separate natural gas provided to end-users. outlined in § 98.404.
CO 2 = 1 x 10−3 Fuel HHV EF (Eq. NN-1)
Where: 1 × 10¥3 = Conversion factor from kilograms CO2 = Annual CO2 mass emissions from the
CO2 = Annual potential CO2 mass emissions to metric tons (MT/kg). combustion of fuel supplied (metric
from the combustion of fuel (metric tons)
tons). (2) Calculation Methodology 2. Fuel = Total annual volume of fuel or
Fuel = Total annual volume of fuel or Estimate CO2 emissions using Equation product supplied (bbl or Mcf per year)
product (volume per year, typically in NN–2. EF = Fuel-specific CO2 emission factor (MT
EP10AP09.180</MATH>
Mcf for gaseous fuels and bbl for liquid CO2/bbl, or MT CO2/Mcf)
fuels). CO 2 = Fuel EF (Eq. NN- 2)
HHV = Higher heat value of the fuel supplied § 98.404 Monitoring and QA/QC
(MMBtu/Mcf or MMBtu/bbl). requirements.
Where:
EF = Fuel-specific CO2 emission factor (kg (a) The quantity of natural gas liquids
EP10AP09.179</MATH>
CO2/MMBtu). and natural gas must be determined
using any of the oil and gas flow meter quantity measurement must be used in end users on the local distribution
test methods that are in common use in the calculations according to paragraphs company’s distribution system.
the industry and consistent with the Gas (b) and (c) of this section. (2) The total annual CO2 mass
Processors Association Technical (b) For NGLs, natural gas processing emissions associated with the volumes
Manual and the American Gas plants shall substitute meter records in paragraph (b)(1) of this section and
Association Gas Measurement provided by pipeline(s) for all pipeline calculated in accordance with § 98.403.
Committee reports. receipts of NGLs; by manifests for (3) The total natural gas volumes
(b) The minimum frequency of the deliveries made to trucks or rail cars; or received for redelivery to downstream
measurements of quantities of natural metered quantities accepted by the gas transmission pipelines and other
gas liquids and natural gas shall be entities purchasing the output from the local distribution companies.
based on the industry standard practices processing plant whether by pipeline or (4) The name and EPA and EIA
for commercial operations. For natural by truck or rail car. In cases where the identification code of each individual
gas liquids these are measurements metered data from the receiving covered facility, and the name and EIA
taken at custody transfers summed to pipeline(s) or purchasing entities are not identification code of any other end-
the annual reportable volume. For available, natural gas processors may user for which the local gas distribution
natural gas these are daily totals of substitute estimates based on contract company delivered greater than or equal
continuous measurements, and summed quantities required to be delivered to 460,000 Mcf during the calendar year,
to the annual reportable volume. under purchase or delivery contracts and the total natural gas volumes
(c) All flow meters and product or with other parties. actually delivered to each of these end-
fuel composition monitors shall be (c) Natural gas local distribution users.
calibrated prior to the first reporting companies may substitute the metered (5) The annual volume in Mcf of
year, using a suitable method published quantities from the delivering pipelines natural gas delivered by the local
by the American Gas Association Gas for all deliveries into the distribution distribution company to each of the
Measurement Committee reports on system. In cases where the pipeline following end-use categories. For
flow metering and heating value metered delivery data are not available, definitions of these categories, refer to
calculations and the Gas Processors local distribution companies may EIA Form 176 and Instructions.
Association standards on measurement
substitute their pipeline nominations (i) Residential consumers.
and heating value. Alternatively,
and scheduled quantities for the period (ii) Commercial consumers.
calibration procedures specified by the
when metered values of actual (iii) Industrial consumers.
flow meter manufacturer may be used.
deliveries are not available. (iv) Electricity generating facilities.
Fuel flow meters shall be recalibrated
(d) Estimates of missing data shall be (6) The total annual CO2 mass
either annually or at the minimum
documented and records maintained emissions associated with the volumes
frequency specified by the
manufacturer. showing the calculations of the values in paragraph (b)(5) of this section and
(d) Reporter-specific emission factors used for the missing data. calculated in accordance with § 98.403.
or higher heating values shall be § 98.406 Data reporting requirements. § 98.407 Records that must be retained.
determined using industry standard
(a) In addition to the information In addition to the information
practices such as the American Gas
required by § 98.3(c), the annual report required by § 98.3(g), each annual report
Association (AGA) Gas Measurement
for each natural gas processing plant must contain the following information:
Committee Report on heating value and
must contain the following information. (a) Records of all daily meter readings
the Gas Processors Association (GPA)
(1) The total annual quantity in and documentation to support volumes
Technical Standards Manual for NGL
barrels of NGLs produced for sale or of natural gas and NGLs that are
heating value; and ASTM D–2597–94
delivery on behalf of others in the reported under this part.
and ASTM D–1945–03 for
following categories: Propane, natural (b) Records documenting any
compositional analysis necessary for
butane, ethane, and isobutane, and all estimates of missing metered data.
estimating CO2 emission factors.
other bulk NGLs as a single category. (c) Calculations and worksheets used
§ 98.405 Procedures for estimating (2) The total annual CO2 mass to estimate CO2 emissions for the
missing data. emissions associated with the volumes volumes reported under this part.
(a) A complete record of all measured in paragraph (a)(1) of this section and (d) Records related to the large end-
parameters used in the reporting of fuel calculated in accordance with § 98.403. users identified in § 98.406(b)(4).
volumes and in the calculations of CO2 (b) In addition to the information (e) Records relating to measured Btu
mass emissions is required. Therefore, required by § 98.3(c), the annual report content or carbon content.
whenever a quality-assured value of the for each local distribution company
quantity of natural gas liquids or natural must contain the following information. § 98.408 Definitions.
gas during any period is unavailable (1) The total annual volume in Mcf of All terms used in this subpart have
(e.g., if a flow meter malfunctions), a natural gas received by the local the same meaning given in the Clean Air
substitute data value for the missing distribution company for redelivery to Act and subpart A of this part.
TABLE NN–1 OF SUBPART NN—DEFAULT FACTORS FOR CALCULATION METHODOLOGY 1 OF THIS SUBPART
Default CO2
emission
Fuel Default high heating value factor factor (kg
CO2/
MMBtu)
Natural Gas .................................................................................. 1.027 MMBtu/Mcf ......................................................................... 53.02

Propane ........................................................................................ 3.836 MMBtu/bbl .......................................................................... 63.02
Butane .......................................................................................... 4.326 MMBtu/bbl .......................................................................... 64.93
TABLE NN–1 OF SUBPART NN—DEFAULT FACTORS FOR CALCULATION METHODOLOGY 1 OF THIS SUBPART—Continued
Default CO2
emission
Fuel Default high heating value factor factor (kg
CO2/
MMBtu)
Ethane .......................................................................................... 3.082 MMBtu/bbl .......................................................................... 59.58

Isobutane ...................................................................................... 3.974 MMBtu/bbl .......................................................................... 65.08
Natural Gas Liquids ...................................................................... 4.140 MMBtu/bbl .......................................................................... 63.20
TABLE NN–2 OF SUBPART NN—LOOKUP DEFAULT VALUES FOR CALCULATION METHODOLOGY 2 OF THIS SUBPART
Default CO2
emission
Fuel Unit value (MT
CO2/Unit)
Natural Gas .................................................................................. Mcf ................................................................................................ 0.054452

Propane ........................................................................................ Barrel ............................................................................................ 0.241745
Butane .......................................................................................... Barrel ............................................................................................ 0.280887
Ethane .......................................................................................... Barrel ............................................................................................ 0.183626
Isobutane ...................................................................................... Barrel ............................................................................................ 0.258628
Natural Gas Liquids ...................................................................... Barrel ............................................................................................ 0.261648
Subpart OO—Suppliers of Industrial annually shall be estimated by using R = Mass of residual, unreacted fluorinated
Greenhouse Gases Equation OO–1 of this section: GHG or nitrous oxide that is
permanently removed from the
§ 98.410 Definition of the source category. n transformation process (metric tons).
(a) The industrial gas supplier source P = ∑ Pp (Eq. OO-1) (d) The total mass of each fluorinated
category consists of any facility that p =1 GHG destroyed shall be estimated by
produces a fluorinated GHG or nitrous Where: using Equation OO–4 of this section:
oxide, any bulk importer of fluorinated
P = Mass of fluorinated GHG or nitrous oxide
GHGs or nitrous oxide, and any bulk produced annually.
D = FD ∗ DE (Eq. OO- 4)
exporter of fluorinated GHGs or nitrous Pp = Mass of fluorinated GHG or nitrous Where:
oxide. oxide produced over the period ‘‘p’’. D = Mass of fluorinated GHG destroyed
(b) To produce a fluorinated GHG annually (metric tons).
means to manufacture a fluorinated (b) The total mass of each fluorinated FD = Mass of fluorinated GHG fed into the
GHG from any raw material or feedstock GHG or nitrous oxide produced over the destruction device annually (metric
chemical. Producing a fluorinated GHGs period ‘‘p’’ shall be estimated by using tons).
does not include the reuse or recycling Equation OO–2 of this section: DE = Destruction efficiency of the destruction
of a fluorinated GHG or the generation device (fraction).
of HFC–23 during the production of Pp = O p − U p (Eq. OO-2) § 98.414 Monitoring and QA/QC
HCFC–22. requirements.
Where:
(c) To produce nitrous oxide means to (a) The mass of fluorinated GHGs or
produce nitrous oxide by thermally Pp = Mass of fluorinated GHG or nitrous
oxide produced over the period ‘‘p’’ nitrous oxide coming out of the
decomposing ammonium nitrate (metric tons). production process shall be measured at
(NH4NO3). Producing nitrous oxide does Op = Mass of fluorinated GHG or nitrous least daily using flowmeters, weigh
not include the reuse or recycling of oxide that is measured coming out of the scales, or a combination of volumetric
nitrous oxide or the creation of by- production process over the period p and density measurements with an
products that are released or destroyed (metric tons).
accuracy and precision of 0.2 percent of
at the production facility. Up = Mass of used fluorinated GHG or nitrous
oxide that is added to the production full scale or better.
§ 98.411 Reporting threshold. process upstream of the output (b) The mass of any used fluorinated EP10AP09.184</MATH>
Any supplier of industrial greenhouse measurement over the period ‘‘p’’ (metric GHGs or used nitrous oxide added back
gases who meets the requirements of tons). into the production process upstream of
§ 98.2(a)(4) must report GHG emissions. the output measurement in paragraph
(c) The total mass of each fluorinated (a) of this section shall be measured at
GHG or nitrous oxide transformed shall
EP10AP09.183</MATH>
§ 98.412 GHGs to report. least daily (when being added) using

You must report the GHG emissions be estimated by using Equation OO–3 of flowmeters, weigh scales, or a
that would result from the release of the this section: combination of volumetric and density
nitrous oxide and each fluorinated GHG measurements with an accuracy and
that you produce, import, export, T = FT − R (Eq. OO-3) precision of 0.2 percent of full scale or
EP10AP09.182</MATH>
transform, or destroy during the Where: better.

calendar year. T = Mass of fluorinated GHG or nitrous oxide
(c) The mass of fluorinated GHGs or
transformed annually (metric tons). nitrous oxide fed into transformation
§ 98.413 Calculating GHG emissions. FT = Mass of fluorinated GHG fed into the processes shall be measured at least
(a) The total mass of each fluorinated transformation process annually (metric daily using flowmeters, weigh scales, or
EP10AP09.181</MATH>
GHG or nitrous oxide produced tons). a combination of volumetric and density
measurements with an accuracy and concentrations of fluorinated GHG being calibration procedures specified by the
precision of 0.2 percent of full scale or destroyed shall be measured at least flowmeter, scale, or load cell
better. daily using equipment and methods manufacturer may be used. Calibration
(d) If unreacted fluorinated GHGs or (e.g., gas chromatography) with an shall be performed prior to the first
nitrous oxide are permanently removed accuracy and precision of 5 percent or reporting year. After the initial
(recovered, destroyed, or emitted) from better at the concentrations of the calibration, recalibration shall be
the transformation process, the mass process samples. This concentration performed at least annually or at the
removed shall be measured using (mass fraction) shall be multiplied by minimum frequency specified by the
flowmeters, weigh scales, or a the mass measurement to obtain the manufacturer, whichever is more
combination of volumetric and density mass of the fluorinated GHG destroyed. frequent.
measurements with an accuracy and (h) For purposes of Equation OO–4, (k) All gas chromatographs that are
precision of 0.2 percent of full scale or the destruction efficiency can initially used to measure or calculate quantities
better. If the measured mass includes be equated to the destruction efficiency that are to be reported under this
more than trace concentrations of determined during a previous subpart shall be calibrated at least
materials other than the unreacted performance test of the destruction monthly through analysis of certified
fluorinated GHG or nitrous oxide, the device or, if no performance test has standards with known concentrations of
concentration of the unreacted been done, the destruction efficiency the same chemical(s) in the same
fluorinated GHG or nitrous oxide shall provided by the manufacturer of the range(s) (fractions by mass) as the
be measured at least daily using destruction device. Fluorinated GHG process samples. Calibration gases
equipment and methods (e.g., gas production facilities that destroy prepared from a high-concentration
chromatography) with an accuracy and fluorinated GHGs shall conduct annual certified standard using a gas dilution
precision of 5 percent or better at the measurements of mass flow and system that meets the requirements
concentrations of the process samples. fluorinated GHG concentrations at the specified in Test Method 205, 40 CFR
This concentration (mass fraction) shall outlet of the thermal oxidizer in Part 51, Appendix M may also be used.
be multiplied by the mass measurement accordance with EPA Method 18 at 40
to obtain the mass of the fluorinated CFR part 60, appendix A–6. Tests shall § 98.415 Procedures for estimating
missing data.
GHG or nitrous oxide permanently be conducted under conditions that are
removed from the transformation typical for the production process and (a) A complete record of all measured
process. destruction device at the facility. The parameters used in the GHG emissions
(e) The mass of fluorinated GHG or sensitivity of the emissions tests shall be calculations is required. Therefore,
nitrous oxide sent to another facility for sufficient to detect emissions equal to whenever a quality-assured value of a
transformation shall be measured at 0.01 percent of the mass of fluorinated required parameter is unavailable (e.g.,
least daily using flowmeters, weigh GHGs being fed into the destruction if a meter malfunctions), a substitute
scales, or a combination of volumetric device. If the test indicates that the data value for the missing parameter
and density measurements with an actual DE of the destruction device is shall be used in the calculations,
accuracy and precision of 0.2 percent of lower than the previously determined according to the following requirements:
full scale or better. DE, facilities shall either: (1) For each missing value of the mass
(f) The mass of fluorinated GHG sent (1) Substitute the DE implied by the produced, fed into the production
to another facility for destruction shall most recent emissions test for the process (for used material being
be measured at least daily using previously determined DE in the reclaimed), fed into transformation
flowmeters, weigh scales, or a calculations in § 98.413, or processes, fed into destruction devices,
combination of volumetric and density (2) Perform more extensive sent to another facility for
measurements with an accuracy and performance testing of the DE of the transformation, or sent to another
precision of 0.2 percent of full scale or oxidizer and use the DE determined by facility for destruction, the substitute
better. If the measured mass includes the more extensive testing in the value of that parameter shall be a
more than trace concentrations of calculations in § 98.413. secondary mass measurement. For
materials other than the fluorinated (i) In their estimates of the mass of example, if the mass produced is
GHG, the concentration of the fluorinated GHGs destroyed, designated usually measured with a flowmeter at
fluorinated GHG shall be measured at representatives of fluorinated GHG the inlet to the day tank and that
least daily using equipment and production facilities that destroy flowmeter fails to meet an accuracy or
methods (e.g., gas chromatography) with fluorinated GHGs shall account for any precision test, malfunctions, or is
an accuracy and precision of 5 percent temporary reductions in the destruction rendered inoperable, then the mass
or better at the concentrations of the efficiency that result from any startups, produced may be estimated by
process samples. This concentration shutdowns, or malfunctions of the calculating the change in volume in the
(mass fraction) shall be multiplied by destruction device, including departures day tank and multiplying it by the
the mass measurement to obtain the from the operating conditions defined in density of the product.
mass of the fluorinated GHG sent to state or local permitting requirements (2) For each missing value of
another facility for destruction. and/or oxidizer manufacturer fluorinated GHG concentration, except
(g) The mass of fluorinated GHGs fed specifications. the annual destruction device outlet
into the destruction device shall be (j) All flowmeters, weigh scales, and concentration measurement specified in
measured at least daily using combinations of volumetric and density § 98.414(h), the substitute data value
flowmeters, weigh scales, or a measurements that are used to measure shall be the arithmetic average of the
combination of volumetric and density or calculate quantities that are to be quality-assured values of that parameter
measurements with an accuracy and reported under this subpart shall be immediately preceding and immediately
precision of 0.2 percent of full scale or calibrated using suitable NIST-traceable following the missing data incident. If,
better. If the measured mass includes standards and suitable methods for a particular parameter, no quality-
more than trace concentrations of published by a consensus standards assured data are available prior to the
materials other than the fluorinated organization (e.g., ASTM, ASME, missing data incident, the substitute
GHG being destroyed, the ASHRAE, or others). Alternatively, data value shall be the first quality-
assured value obtained after the missing (metric tons) of nitrous oxide and of (1) Total mass in metric tons of
data period. There are no missing value each fluorinated GHG that were sent to nitrous oxide and each fluorinated GHG
allowances for the annual destruction each for transformation. imported in bulk.
device outlet concentration (10) Names and addresses of facilities (2) Total mass in metric tons of
measurement. A re-test must be to which any fluorinated GHGs were nitrous oxide and each fluorinated GHG
performed if the data from the annual sent for destruction, and the quantities imported in bulk and sold or transferred
destruction device outlet concentration (metric tons) of nitrous oxide and of to persons other than the importer for
measurement are determined to be each fluorinated GHG that were sent to use in processes resulting in the
unacceptable or not representative of each for destruction. transformation or destruction of the
typical operations. (11) Where missing data have been chemical.
(3) Notwithstanding paragraphs (a)(1) estimated pursuant to § 98.415, the (3) Date on which the fluorinated
and (2) of this section, if the owner or reason the data were missing, the length GHGs or nitrous oxide were imported.
operator has reason to believe that the of time the data were missing, the (4) Port of entry through which the
methods specified in paragraphs (a)(1) method used to estimate the missing fluorinated GHGs or nitrous oxide
and (2) of this section are likely to data, and the estimates of those data. passed.
significantly under- or overestimate the Where the missing data have been (5) Country from which the imported
value of the parameter during the period estimated pursuant to § 98.415(a)(3), the fluorinated GHGs or nitrous oxide were
when data were missing, the designated report shall explain the rationale for the imported.
methods used to estimate the missing (6) Commodity code of the fluorinated
representative of the fluorinated GHG
data and why the methods specified in GHGs or nitrous oxide shipped.
production facility shall develop his or (7) Importer number for the shipment.
her best estimate of the parameter, § 98.415(a)(1) and (2) would lead to a (8) If applicable, the names and
documenting the methods used, the significant under- or overestimate of the addresses of the persons and facilities to
rationale behind them, and the reasons parameters. which the nitrous oxide or fluorinated
why the methods specified in (b) A fluorinated GHG production GHGs were sold or transferred for
paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section facility that destroys fluorinated GHGs transformation, and the quantities
would probably lead to a significant shall report the results of the annual (metric tons) of nitrous oxide and of
under- or overestimate of the parameter. fluorinated GHG concentration each fluorinated GHG that were sold or
EPA may reject the alternative estimate measurements at the outlet of the transferred to each facility for
and replace it with an estimate based on destruction device, including: transformation.
the applicable method in paragraph (1) Flow rate of fluorinated GHG being (9) If applicable, the names and
(a)(1) or (2) if EPA does not agree with fed into the destruction device in kg/hr. addresses of the persons and facilities to
the rationale or method for the (2) Concentration (mass fraction) of which the nitrous oxide or fluorinated
alternative estimate. fluorinated GHG at the outlet of the GHGs were sold or transferred for
destruction device. destruction, and the quantities (metric
§ 98.416 Data reporting requirements. (3) Flow rate at the outlet of the
tons) of nitrous oxide and of each
In addition to the information destruction device in kg/hr.
fluorinated GHG that were sold or
required by § 98.3(c), each annual report (4) Emission rate calculated from
transferred to each facility for
must contain the following information: (b)(2) and (b)(3) in kg/hr.
(c) A fluorinated GHG production destruction.
(a) Each fluorinated GHG or nitrous (e) A bulk exporter of fluorinated
oxide production facility shall report facility that destroys fluorinated GHGs
GHGs or nitrous oxide shall submit an
the following information at the facility shall submit a one-time report
annual report that summarizes their
level: containing the following information:
(1) Destruction efficiency (DE) of each exports at the corporate level, except for
(1) Total mass in metric tons of each
destruction unit. transshipments and heels. The report
fluorinated GHG or nitrous oxide
(2) Test methods used to determine shall contain the following information
produced at that facility.
the destruction efficiency. for each export:
(2) Total mass in metric tons of each (1) Total mass in metric tons of
fluorinated GHG or nitrous oxide (3) Methods used to record the mass
of fluorinated GHG destroyed. nitrous oxide and each fluorinated GHG
transformed at that facility. exported in bulk.
(3) Total mass in metric tons of each (4) Chemical identity of the
(2) Names and addresses of the
fluorinated GHG destroyed at that fluorinated GHG(s) used in the
exporter and the recipient of the
facility. performance test conducted to
exports.
(4) Total mass in metric tons of any determine DE.
(3) Exporter’s Employee Identification
fluorinated GHG or nitrous oxide sent to (5) Name of all applicable federal or
Number.
another facility for transformation. state regulations that may apply to the (4) Quantity exported by chemical in
(5) Total mass in metric tons of any destruction process. metric tons of chemical.
fluorinated GHG sent to another facility (6) If any process changes affect unit (5) Commodity code of the fluorinated
for destruction. destruction efficiency or the methods GHGs and nitrous oxide shipped.
(6) Total mass in metric tons of each used to record mass of fluorinated GHG (6) Date on which, and the port from
reactant fed into the production process. destroyed, then a revised report must be which, fluorinated GHGs and nitrous
(7) Total mass in metric tons of each submitted to reflect the changes. The oxide were exported from the United
non-GHG reactant and by-product revised report must be submitted to EPA States or its territories.
permanently removed from the process. within 60 days of the change. (7) Country to which the fluorinated
(8) Mass of used product added back (d) A bulk importer of fluorinated GHGs or nitrous oxide were exported.
into the production process (e.g., for GHGs or nitrous oxide shall submit an
reclamation). annual report that summarizes their § 98.417 Records that must be retained.
(9) Names and addresses of facilities imports at the corporate level, except for (a) In addition to the data required by
to which any nitrous oxide or transshipments and heels. The report § 98.3(g), the designated representative
fluorinated GHGs were sent for shall contain the following information of a fluorinated GHG production facility
transformation, and the quantities for each import: shall retain the following records:
(1) Dated records of the data used to source; or a waste, wastewater, or water (c) Importers or exporters of a carbon
estimate the data reported under treatment process. dioxide stream must calculate quarterly
§ 98.416, and (2) Facilities with CO2 production the total mass of carbon dioxide
(2) Records documenting the initial wells. imported or exported in metric tons,
and periodic calibration of the gas (3) Importers or exporters of bulk CO2. based on multiplying the mass flow by
chromatographs, weigh scales, (b) This source category does not the composition data, according to
flowmeters, and volumetric and density include the following: Equation PP–1. Mass flow and
measures used to measure the quantities (1) Geologic sequestration (long term composition data measurements are
reported under this subpart, including storage) of CO2. made in accordance with § 98.424. The
the industry standards or manufacturer (2) Injection and subsequent quantities of CO2 imported or exported
directions used for calibration pursuant production and/or processing of CO2 for in equipment, such as fire extinguishers,
to § 98.414(j) and (k). enhanced oil and gas recovery. need not be calculated or reported.
(b) In addition to the data required by (3) Above ground storage of CO2.
(4) Transportation or distribution of § 98.424 Monitoring and QA/QC
paragraph (a) of this section, the
CO2 via pipelines, vessels, motor requirements.
designated representative of a
carriers, or other means. (a) Facilities with production process
fluorinated GHG production facility that (5) Purification, compression, or
destroys fluorinated GHGs shall keep units that capture a carbon dioxide
processing of CO2.
records of test reports and other (6) CO2 imported or exported in stream must measure on a quarterly
information documenting the facility’s equipment. basis using a mass flow meter the mass
one-time destruction efficiency report flow of the CO2 stream captured. If
and annual destruction device outlet § 98.421 Reporting threshold. production process units do not have
reports in § 98.416(b) and (c). Any supplier of CO2 who meets the mass flow meters installed to measure
(c) In addition to the data required by requirements of § 98.2(a)(4) must report the mass flow of the CO2 stream
§ 98.3(g), the designated representative GHG emissions. captured, measurements shall be based
of a bulk importer shall retain the on the mass flow of gas transferred off
following records substantiating each of § 98.422 GHGs to report. site using a mass flow meter. In either
the imports that they report: You must report the mass of carbon case, sampling also must be conducted
(1) A copy of the bill of lading for the dioxide captured from production on at least a quarterly basis to determine
import. process units, the mass of carbon the composition of the captured or
(2) The invoice for the import. dioxide extracted from carbon dioxide transferred CO2 stream.
(3) The U.S. Customs entry form. production wells, and the mass of (b) Carbon dioxide production well
(d) In addition to the data required by carbon dioxide imported and exported facilities must measure on a quarterly
§ 98.3(g), the designated representative regardless of the degree of impurities in basis the mass flow of the CO2 stream
of a bulk exporter shall retain the the carbon dioxide stream. extracted using a mass flow meter. If the
following records substantiating each of § 98.423 Calculating GHG emissions. CO2 production wells do not have mass
the exports that they report: flow meters installed to measure the
(a) Facilities with production process
(1) A copy of the bill of lading for the mass flow of the CO2 stream extracted,
units must calculate quarterly the total
export and measurements shall be based on mass
mass of carbon dioxide in a carbon
(2) The invoice for the import. flow of gas transferred off site using a
(e) Every person who imports a dioxide stream in metric tons captured,
prior to any subsequent purification, mass flow meter. In either case,
container with a heel shall keep records sampling must be conducted on at least
of the amount brought into the United processing, or compressing, based on
multiplying the mass flow by the a quarterly basis to determine the
States that document that the residual composition of the extracted or
amount in each shipment is less than 10 composition data, according to Equation
PP–1 of this section. Mass flow and transferred carbon dioxide.
percent of the volume of the container (c) Importers or exporters of bulk CO2
and will: composition data measurements are
made in accordance with § 98.424. must measure on a quarterly basis the
(1) Remain in the container and be mass flow of the CO2 stream imported
included in a future shipment. 4 or exported using a mass flow meter and
(2) Be recovered and transformed. CO 2 = ∑ Q ∗ CCO 2 (Eq. PP-1) must conduct sampling on at least a
(3) Be recovered and destroyed. p =1 quarterly basis to determine the
§ 98.418 Definitions. Where: composition of the imported or exported
All terms used in this subpart have CO2 = CO2 mass emission (metric tons per CO2 stream. If the importer of a CO2
the same meaning given in the Clean Air year). stream does not have mass flow meters
Act and subpart A of this part. CCO2 = Quarterly average CO2 concentration installed to measure the mass flow of
in flow (wt. % CO2). gas imported, the measurements shall be
Q = Quarterly mass flow rate (metric tons per based on the mass flow of the imported
Subpart PP—Suppliers of Carbon
quarter). CO2 stream transferred off site or used
Dioxide
(b) CO2 production well facilities in on-site processes, as measured by
§ 98.420 Definition of the source category. must calculate quarterly the total mass mass flow meters. If an exporter of a
(a) The carbon dioxide (CO2) supplier of carbon dioxide in a carbon dioxide CO2 stream does not have mass flow
source category consists of the stream from wells in metric tons, prior meters installed to measure the mass
following: to any subsequent purification, flow exported, the measurements shall
(1) Production process units that processing, or compressing, based on be based on the mass flow of the CO2
capture a CO2 stream for purposes of multiplying the mass flow by the stream received for export, as measured
supplying CO2 for commercial composition data, according to Equation by mass flow meters. In all cases,
applications. Capture refers to the PP–1. Mass flow and composition data sampling on at least a quarterly basis
separation and removal of CO2 from a measurements are made in accordance also must be conducted to determine the
EP10AP09.185</MATH>
manufacturing process; fuel combustion with § 98.424. composition of the CO2 stream.
(d) Mass flow meter calibrations must (xi) Long-term storage (sequestration). Subpart C—[Amended]
be NIST traceable. (xii) Research and development.
(e) Methods to measure the (b) CO2 importers and exporters must 30. Section 1033.205 is amended by
composition of the carbon dioxide report the information in paragraphs revising paragraph (d)(8) to read as
captured, extracted, transferred, (a)(1) and (a)(2) at the corporate level. follows:
imported, or exported must conform to § 1033.205 Applying for a certificate of
§ 98.427 Records that must be retained.
applicable chemical analytical conformity.
standards. Acceptable methods include In addition to the records required by
§ 98.3(g), you must retain the records * * * * *
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (d) * * *
food-grade specifications for carbon specified in paragraphs (a) through (c) of
this section. (8)(i) All test data you obtained for
dioxide (see 21 CFR 184.1250) and each test engine or locomotive. As
ASTM standard E–1745–95 (2005). (a) The owner or operator of a facility
containing production process units described in § 1033.235, we may allow
§ 98.425 Procedures for estimating must retain quarterly records of you to demonstrate compliance based
missing data. captured and transferred CO2 streams on results from previous emission tests,
(a) Missing quarterly monitoring data and composition. development tests, or other testing
on mass flow of CO2 streams captured, (b) The owner or operator of a carbon information. Include data for NOX, PM,
extracted, imported, or exported shall be dioxide production well facility must HC, CO, and CO2.
substituted with the greater of the maintain quarterly records of the mass (ii) Starting in the 2011 model year,
following values: flow of the extracted and transferred report measured N2O and CH4 as
CO2 stream and composition. described in § 1033.235. Small
(1) Quarterly CO2 mass flow of gas (c) Importers or exporters of CO2 must manufacturers/remanufacturers may
transferred off site measured during the retain quarterly records of the mass flow omit this requirement.
current reporting year. and composition of CO2 streams * * * * *
(2) Quarterly or annual average values imported or exported. 31. Section 1033.235 is amended by
of the monitored CO2 mass flow from adding paragraph (i) to read as follows:
the past calendar year.
(b) Missing monitoring data on the All terms used in this subpart have § 1033.235 Emission testing required for
mass flow of the CO2 stream transferred the same meaning given in the Clean Air certification.
off site shall be substituted with the Act and subpart A of this part. * * * * *
quarterly or annual average values from (i) Starting in the 2011 model year,
PART 600—[AMENDED] measure N2O, and CH4 with each low-
off site transfers from the past calendar
year. 27. The authority citation for part 600 hour certification test using the
(c) Missing data on composition of the continues to read as follows: procedures specified in 40 CFR part
CO2 stream captured, extracted, 1065. Small manufacturers/
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 32901–23919q, Pub.
transferred, imported, or exported may L. 109–58.
remanufacturers may omit this
be substituted for with quarterly or requirement. Use the same units and
annual average values from the past Subpart A—[Amended] modal calculations as for your other
calendar year. results to report a single weighted value
28. Section 600.006–08 is amended by for CO2, N2O, and CH4. Round the final
§ 98.426 Data reporting requirements. revising paragraph (c) introductory text values as follows:
In addition to the information and adding paragraph (c)(5) to read as (1) Round CO2 to the nearest 1 g/kW-
required by § 98.3(c), each annual report follows: hr.
must contain the following information. (2) Round N2O to the nearest 0.001 g/
§ 600.006–08 Data and information
(a) Each facility with production kW-hr.
requirements for fuel economy vehicles.
process units or CO2 production wells (3) Round CH4 to the nearest 0.001g/
must report the following information: * * * * *
(c) The manufacturer shall submit the kW-hr.
(1) Total annual mass in metric tons
and the weighted average composition following data: Subpart J—[Amended]
of the CO2 stream captured, extracted, or * * * * *
transferred in either gas, liquid, or solid (5) Starting with the 2011 model year, 32. Section 1033.905 is amended by
forms. the data submitted according to adding the abbreviations CH4 and N2O
(2) Annual quantities in metric tons paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4) of this in alphanumeric order to read as
transferred to the following end use section shall include CO2, N2O, and CH4 follows:
applications by end-use, if known: in addition to fuel economy. Use the § 1033.905 Symbols, acronyms, and
(i) Food and beverage. procedures specified in 40 CFR part abbreviations.
(ii) Industrial and municipal water/ 1065 as needed to measure N2O and
* * * * *
wastewater treatment. CH4. Round the test results as follows:
(iii) Metal fabrication, including (i) Round CO2 to the nearest 1 g/mi.
(ii) Round N2O to the nearest 0.001 g/ * * * * * * *
welding and cutting.
(iv) Greenhouse uses for plant growth. mi. CH4 methane.
(v) Fumigants (e.g., grain storage) and (iii) Round CH4 to the nearest 0.001g/ * * * * * * *
herbicides. mi. N2O nitrous oxide.
(vi) Pulp and paper. * * * * * * * * * * * *
(vii) Cleaning and solvent use.
(viii) Fire fighting. PART 1033—[AMENDED] PART 1039—[AMENDED]
(ix) Transportation and storage of
explosives. 29. The authority citation for part 33. The authority citation for part
(x) Enhanced oil and natural gas 1033 continues to read as follows: 1039 continues to read as follows:
recovery. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.
Subpart C—[Amended] PART 1042—[AMENDED] N2O nitrous oxide.

* * * * * * *
34. Section 1039.205 is amended by 37. The authority citation for part
revising paragraph (r) to read as follows: 1042 continues to read as follows: PART 1045—[AMENDED]
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.
§ 1039.205 What must I include in my 41. The authority citation for part
application? 1045 continues to read as follows:
Subpart C—[Amended]
* * * * * Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.
(r) Report test results as follows: 38. Section 1042.205 is amended by
(1) Report all test results involving revising paragraph (r) to read as follows: Subpart C—[Amended]
measurement of pollutants for which § 1042.205 Application requirements.
emission standards apply. Include test 42. Section 1045.205 is amended by
* * * * * revising paragraph (q) to read as follows:
results from invalid tests or from any (r) Report test results as follows:
other tests, whether or not they were (1) Report all test results involving § 1045.205 What must I include in my
conducted according to the test measurement of pollutants for which application?
procedures of subpart F of this part. We emission standards apply. Include test * * * * *
may ask you to send other information results from invalid tests or from any (q) Report test results as follows:
to confirm that your tests were valid other tests, whether or not they were (1) Report all test results involving
under the requirements of this part and conducted according to the test measurement of pollutants for which
40 CFR part 1065. procedures of subpart F of this part. We emission standards apply. Include test
(2) Starting in the 2011 model year, may ask you to send other information results from invalid tests or from any
report measured CO2 , N2O, and CH4 as to confirm that your tests were valid other tests, whether or not they were
described in § 1039.235. Small-volume under the requirements of this part and conducted according to the test
engine manufacturers may omit this 40 CFR part 1065. procedures of subpart F of this part. We
requirement. (2) Starting in the 2011 model year, may ask you to send other information
* * * * * report measured CO2, N2O, and CH4 as to confirm that your tests were valid
35. Section 1039.235 is amended by described in § 1042.235. Small-volume under the requirements of this part and
adding paragraph (g) to read as follows: engine manufacturers may omit this 40 CFR parts 1060 and 1065.
requirement. (2) Starting in the 2011 model year,
§ 1039.235 What emission testing must I report measured CO2, N2O, and CH4 as
* * * * *
perform for my application for a certificate described in § 1045.235. Small-volume
of conformity? 39. Section 1042.235 is amended by
adding paragraph (g) to read as follows: engine manufacturers may omit this
* * * * * requirement.
(g) Starting in the 2011 model year, § 1042.235 Emission testing required for a
certificate of conformity.
* * * * *
measure CO2, N2O, and CH4 with each 43. Section 1045.235 is amended by
low-hour certification test using the * * * * * adding paragraph (g) to read as follows:
procedures specified in 40 CFR part (g) Starting in the 2011 model year,
1065. Small-volume engine measure CO2, N2O, and CH4 with each § 1045.235 What emission testing must I
manufacturers may omit this low-hour certification test using the perform for my application for a certificate
requirement. These measurements are procedures specified in 40 CFR part of conformity?
not required for NTE testing. Use the 1065. Small-volume engine * * * * *
same units and modal calculations as manufacturers may omit this (g) Measure CO2, N2O, and CH4 with
for your other results to report a single requirement. These measurements are each low-hour certification test using
weighted value for each constituent. not required for NTE testing. Use the the procedures specified in 40 CFR part
Round the final values as follows: same units and modal calculations as 1065. Small-volume engine
(1) Round CO2 to the nearest 1 g/kW- for your other results to report a single manufacturers may omit this
hr. weighted value for each constituent. requirement. These measurements are
(2) Round N2O to the nearest 0.001 g/ Round the final values as follows: not required for NTE testing. Use the
kW-hr. (1) Round CO2 to the nearest 1 g/kW- same units and modal calculations as
(3) Round CH4 to the nearest 0.001g/ hr. for your other results to report a single
kW-hr. (2) Round N2O to the nearest 0.001 g/ weighted value for each constituent.
kW-hr. Round the final values as follows:
Subpart I—[Amended] (3) Round CH4 to the nearest 0.001g/ (1) Round CO2 to the nearest 1 g/kW-
kW-hr. hr.
36. Section 1039.805 is amended by (2) Round N2O to the nearest 0.001 g/
adding the abbreviations CH4 and N2O Subpart J—[Amended] kW-hr.
in alphanumeric order to read as (3) Round CH4 to the nearest 0.001g/
40. Section 1042.905 is amended by
follows: kW-hr.
adding the abbreviations CH4 and N2O
§ 1039.805 What symbols, acronyms, and in alphanumeric order to read as
follows: PART 1048—[AMENDED]
abbreviations does this part use?
* * * * * § 1042.905 Symbols, acronyms, and
44. The authority citation for part
abbreviations. 1048 continues to read as follows:
* * * * * * * Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.
* * * * *
CH4 methane.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * Subpart C—[Amended]
N2O nitrous oxide. CH4 methane. 45. Section 1048.205 is amended by
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * revising paragraph (s) to read as follows:
§ 1048.205 What must I include in my Subpart C—[Amended] PART 1054—[AMENDED]

application?
* * * * * 49. Section 1051.205 is amended by 52. The authority citation for part
(s) Report test results as follows: revising paragraph (p) to read as 1054 continues to read as follows:
(1) Report all test results involving follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.
measurement of pollutants for which
emission standards apply. Include test § 1051.205 What must I include in my Subpart C—[Amended]
application?
results from invalid tests or from any 53. Section 1054.205 is amended by
other tests, whether or not they were * * * * *
revising paragraph (p) to read as
conducted according to the test (p) Report test results as follows:
follows:
procedures of subpart F of this part. We (1) Report all test results involving
may ask you to send other information measurement of pollutants for which § 1054.205 What must I include in my
to confirm that your tests were valid emission standards apply. Include test application?
under the requirements of this part and results from invalid tests or from any * * * * *
40 CFR part 1065. other tests, whether or not they were (p) Report test results as follows:
(2) Starting in the 2011 model year, conducted according to the test (1) Report all test results involving
report measured CO2, N2O, and CH4 as procedures of subpart F of this part. We measurement of pollutants for which
described in § 1048.235. Small-volume may ask you to send other information emission standards apply. Include test
engine manufacturers may omit this to confirm that your tests were valid results from invalid tests or from any
requirement. under the requirements of this part and other tests, whether or not they were
* * * * * 40 CFR parts 86 and 1065. conducted according to the test
46. Section 1048.235 is amended by (2) Starting in the 2011 model year, procedures of subpart F of this part. We
adding paragraph (g) to read as follows: report measured CO2, N2O, and CH4 as may ask you to send other information
described in § 1051.235. Small-volume to confirm that your tests were valid
§ 1048.235 What emission testing must I under the requirements of this part and
perform for my application for a certificate manufacturers may omit this
requirement. 40 CFR parts 1060 and 1065.
of conformity?
(2) Starting in the 2011 model year,
* * * * * * * * * * report measured CO2, N2O, and CH4 as
(g) Starting in the 2011 model year, 50. Section 1051.235 is amended by described in § 1054.235. Small-volume
measure CO2, N2O, and CH4 with each adding paragraph (i) to read as follows: engine manufacturers may omit this
low-hour certification test using the requirement.
procedures specified in 40 CFR part § 1051.235 What emission testing must I
perform for my application for a certificate * * * * *
of conformity? 54. Section 1054.235 is amended by
manufacturers may omit this
* * * * * adding paragraph (g) to read as follows:
requirement. These measurements are
not required for measurements using (i) Starting in the 2011 model year, § 1054.235 What exhaust emission testing
field-testing procedures. Use the same measure CO2, N2O, and CH4 with each must I perform for my application for a
units and modal calculations as for your low-hour certification test using the certificate of conformity?
other results to report a single weighted procedures specified in 40 CFR part * * * * *
value for each constituent. Round the 1065. Small-volume manufacturers may (g) Measure CO2, N2O, and CH4 with
final values as follows: omit this requirement. Use the same each low-hour certification test using
(1) Round CO2 to the nearest 1 g/kW- units and modal calculations as for your the procedures specified in 40 CFR part
hr. other results to report a single weighted 1065. Small-volume engine
(2) Round N2O to the nearest 0.001 g/ value for each constituent. Round the manufacturers may omit this
kW-hr. final values as follows: requirement. Use the same units and
(3) Round CH4 to the nearest 0.001g/ (1) Round CO2 to the nearest 1 g/kW- modal calculations as for your other
kW-hr. hr or 1 g/km, as appropriate. results to report a single weighted value
(2) Round N2O to the nearest 0.001 for each constituent. Round the final
Subpart I—[Amended]
g/kW-hr or 0.001 g/km, as appropriate. values as follows:
47. Section 1048.805 is amended by (1) Round CO2 to the nearest 1 g/kW-
(3) Round CH4 to the nearest 0.001g/ hr.
adding the abbreviations CH4 and N2O
kW-hr or 0.001 g/km, as appropriate. (2) Round N2O to the nearest 0.001
in alphanumeric order to read as
follows: g/kW-hr.
Subpart I—[Amended]
(3) Round CH4 to the nearest 0.001
§ 1048.805 What symbols, acronyms, and g/kW-hr.
abbreviations does this part use? 51. Section 1051.805 is amended by
adding the abbreviations CH4 and N2O 55. A new part 1064 is added to
* * * * * in alphanumeric order to read as subchapter U of chapter I to read as
follows: follows:
* * * * * * *
CH4 methane. § 1051.805 What symbols, acronyms, and PART 1064—VEHICLE TESTING
* * * * * * * abbreviations does this part use? PROCEDURES
N2O nitrous oxide. * * * * * Subpart A—Applicability and general
* * * * * * * provisions
* * * * * * * Sec.
PART 1051—[AMENDED] CH4 methane. 1064.1 Applicability.
48. The authority citation for part * * * * * * * Subpart B—Air Conditioning Systems
1051 continues to read as follows: N2O nitrous oxide. 1064.201 Method for calculating emissions
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. * * * * * * * due to air conditioning leakage.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. Grams/YRSP = Emission rate for service ports (c) Service ports and refrigerant
and refrigerant control devices as control devices. Determine the emission
Subpart A—Applicability and General described in paragraph (c) of this section. rate for service ports and refrigerant
Provisions Grams/YRFH = Emission rate for flexible control devices using the following
hoses as described in paragraph (d) of Equation:
§ 1064.1 Applicability. this section.
(a) This part describes procedures that Grams/YRMC = Emission rate for heat Grams/YRSP = (0.3 · HSSP) + (0.2 ·
apply to testing we require for 2011 and exchangers, mufflers, receiver/driers, LSSP) + (0.2 · STV) + (0.2 · TXV)
later model year light-duty vehicles, and accumulators as described in
paragraph (e) of this section. Where:
light-duty trucks, and medium-duty
personal vehicles (see 40 CFR part 86). Grams/YRC = Emission rate for compressors HSSP = The number of high side service
(b) See 40 CFR part 86 for as described in paragraph (f) of this ports.
section. LSSP = The number of low side service ports.
measurement procedures related to
STV = The total number of switches,
exhaust and evaporative emissions. (b) Fittings. Determine the emission transducers, and expansion valves.
rate for rigid pipe connections using the TXV = The number of TXV refrigerant
Subpart B—Air Conditioning Systems
following Equation: control devices.
§ 1064.201 Method for calculating
emissions due to air conditioning leakage. Grams/YRRP = 0.00522 · [(125 · SO) + (d) Flexible hoses. Determine the
Determine a refrigerant leakage rate (75 · SCO) + (50 · MO) + (10 · SW) permeation emission rate for each
from vehicle-based air conditioning + (5 · SWO) + (MG)] segment of flexible hose using the
units as described in this section. Where: following Equation, then add those
(a) Emission totals. Calculate an SO = The number of single O-ring
values to calculate a total emission rate
annual rate of refrigerant leakage from connections. for the system:
an air conditioning system using the SCO = The number of single captured O-ring Grams/YRFH = 0.00522 · (3.14159 · ID ·
following equation: connections. L · ER)
Grams/YRTOT = Grams/YRRP + Grams/ MO = The number of multiple O-ring
connections. Where:
YRSP + Grams/YRFH + Grams/YRMC
SW = The number of seal washer ID = Inner diameter of hose, in millimeters.
+ Grams/YRC connections. L = Length of hose, in millimeters.
Where: SWO = The number of seal washer with O- ER = Emission rate per unit internal surface
Grams/YRRP = Emission rate for rigid pipe ring connections. area of the hose, in g/mm2. Select the
connections as described in paragraph MG = The number of metal gasket appropriate value from the following
(b) of this section. connections. table:
ER
Material/configuration High-pressure Low-pressure side
side
Rubber ......................................................................................................................................................... 0.0216 0.0144

Standard barrier or veneer hose ................................................................................................................. 0.0054 0.0036
Ultra-low permeation barrier or veneer hose .............................................................................................. 0.00225 0.00167
(e) Heat exchangers, mufflers, Subpart C—[Amended] 0.0 % (that is, no bias high and no bias
receiver/driers, and accumulators. Use low), regardless of the uncompensated
an emission rate of 0.5 grams per year 57. A new § 1065.257 is added to signal’s bias.
as a combined value for all heat subpart C to read as follows: (c) Artifact formation, SO2, and H2O
exchangers, mufflers, receiver/driers, § 1065.257 Nondispersive N2O infrared removal. SO2, NOX, and H2O have been
and accumulators (Grams/YRMC). analyzer. shown to react in the sample bag to form
(f) Compressors. Determine the N2O. SO2 and H2O must therefore be
(a) Application. Use a nondispersive
sequentially removed from the sample
emission rate for compressors using the infrared (NDIR) analyzer to measure
gas before the sample enters the bag.
following equation: N2O concentrations in diluted exhaust
SO2 can be neutralized from the sample
for batch sampling. Batch sampling may
Grams/YRC = 0.00522 · [(300 · OHS) + gas by passing the sample through a
be performed in a single bag covering all
(200 · MHS) + (150 · FAP) + (100 · GHS) sorbent cartridge packed with 120 cc of
phases of the test procedure.
+ (1500/SSL)] a 10:1 ratio of 18–20 mesh sand and
(b) Component requirements. We
Ca(OH)2. This sorbent works only in the
Where: recommend that you use an NDIR
presence of H2O so the H2O sorbent
OHS = The number of O-ring housing seals. analyzer that meets the specifications in
cartridge must be located downstream of
MHS = The number of molded housing seals. Table 1 of § 1065.205. Note that your
FAP = The number of fitting adapter plates.
the SO2 sorbent cartridge. H2O can be
NDIR-based system must meet the
GHS = The number of gasket housing seals. removed by passing the sample through
calibration and verification in
SSL = The number of lips on shaft seal (for a sorbent cartridge packed with 120 cc
§ 1065.357 and it must also meet the
belt-driven compressors only). of P2O5.
linearity verification in § 1065.307. You 58. A new § 1065.357 is added to
may use an NDIR analyzer that has subpart D to read as follows:
PART 1065—[AMENDED] compensation algorithms that are
functions of other gaseous § 1065.357 CO and Co2 interference
56. The authority citation for part measurements and the engine’s known verification for N2O NDIR analyzers.
1065 continues to read as follows: or assumed fuel properties. The target (a) Scope and frequency. If you
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. value for any compensation algorithm is measure CO using an NDIR analyzer,
verify the amount of CO and Co2 line and to account for analyzer concentration of N2O expected at the
interference after initial analyzer response. standard.
installation and after major (4) While the analyzer measures the (e) Exceptions. The following
maintenance. sample’s concentration, record its exceptions apply:
(b) Measurement principles. CO and output for 30 seconds. Calculate the (1) You may omit this verification if
Co2 can positively interfere with an arithmetic mean of this data. you can show by engineering analysis
NDIR analyzer by causing a response that for your N2O sampling system and
(5) Scale the CO interference by
similar to N2O. If the NDIR analyzer your emission calculations procedures,
multiplying this mean value (from
uses compensation algorithms that the combined CO, CO2, and H2O
paragraph (d)(7) of this section) by the
utilize measurements of other gases to interference for your N2O NDIR analyzer
ratio of expected CO to span gas CO
meet this interference verification, always affects your brake-specific N2O
concentration. In other words, estimate
simultaneously conduct these other emission results within ±0.5 percent of
the flow-weighted mean dry
measurements to test the compensation the applicable N2O standard.
concentration of CO expected during
algorithms during the analyzer (2) You may use a N2O NDIR analyzer
testing, and then divide this value by
interference verification. that you determine does not meet this
the concentration of CO in the span gas
(c) System requirements. A N2O NDIR verification, as long as you try to correct
used for this verification. Then multiply
analyzer must have combined CO and the problem and the measurement
this ratio by the mean value recorded
Co2 interference that is within ±2 during this verification (from paragraph
deficiency does not adversely affect
percent of the flow-weighted mean your ability to show that engines
(d)(7) of this section).
concentration of N2O expected at the comply with all applicable emission
standard, though we strongly (6) Repeat the steps in paragraphs standards.
recommend a lower interference that is (d)(2) through (5) of this section, but
within ±1 percent. with a CO2 analytical gas mixture Subpart H—[Amended]
(d) Procedure. Perform the instead of CO and without humidifying
the sample through the distilled water 59. Section 1065.750 is amended by
interference verification as follows: revising paragraph (a)(1)(ii) and adding
(1) Start, operate, zero, and span the in a sealed vessel.
paragraph (a)(3)(xi) to read as follows:
N2O NDIR analyzer as you would before (7) Add together the CO and CO2-
an emission test. scaled result of paragraphs (d)(5) and (6) § 1065.750 Analytical gases.
(2) Introduce a CO span to the of this section. * * * * *
analyzer. (8) The analyzer meets the (a) * * *
(3) Allow time for the analyzer interference verification if the result of (1) * * *
response to stabilize. Stabilization time paragraph (d)(7) of this section is within (ii) Contamination as specified in the
may include time to purge the transfer ±2 percent of the flow-weighted mean following table:
TABLE 1 OF § 1065.750—GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR PURIFIED GASES

Constituent Purified synthetic air 1 Purified N21
THC (C1 equivalent) ........................................... <0.05 μmol/mol ................................................ <0.05 μmol/mol

CO ...................................................................... <1 μmol/mol ..................................................... <1 μmol/mol.
CO2 .................................................................... <10 μmol/mol ................................................... <10 μmol/mol.
O2 ....................................................................... 0.205 to 0.215 mol/mol .................................... <2 μmol/mol.
NOX .................................................................... <0.02 μmol/mol ................................................ <0.02 μmol/mol.
N2O .................................................................... <0.05 μmol/mol ................................................ <0.05 μmol/mol.
1 We do not require these levels of purity to be NIST-traceable.
* * * * * § 1065.1001 Definitions. 61. Section 1065.1005 is amended by

(3) * * * * * * * * adding items to the table in paragraph
(xi) N2O, balance purified N2. Oxides of nitrogen means NO and (b) in alphanumeric order to read as
NO2 as measured by the procedures follows:
* * * * *
specified in § 1065.270. Oxides of
nitrogen are expressed quantitatively as § 1065.1005 Symbols, abbreviations,
Subpart K—[Amended] acronyms, and units of measure.
if the NO is in the form of NO2, such
60. Section 1065.1001 is amended by that you use an effective molar mass for * * * * *
revising the definition for ‘‘Oxides of all oxides of nitrogen equivalent to that (b) * * *
nitrogen’’ to read as follows: of NO2.
* * * * *
Symbol Species
* * * * * * *
Ca(OH)2 .................................................................................................... calcium hydroxide
* * * * * * *
P2O5 .......................................................................................................... phosphorous pentoxide
* * * * * * *
SO2 ........................................................................................................... sulfur dioxide
* * * * * * *
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E9–5711 Filed 4–9–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

E9 5711 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

E9 5711 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

E9 5711 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Friday,

April 10, 2009

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20004. www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at

TABLE 1—EXAMPLES OF AFFECTED ENTITIES BY CATEGORY

TABLE 1—EXAMPLES OF AFFECTED ENTITIES BY CATEGORY—Continued

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

TABLE 1—EXAMPLES OF AFFECTED ENTITIES BY CATEGORY—Continued

311611 Meat processing facilities.

TABLE 2—SOURCE CATEGORIES AND RELEVANT SUBPARTS

TABLE 2—SOURCE CATEGORIES AND RELEVANT SUBPARTS—Continued

Magnesium Production ............................................................................. General Stationary Fuel Combustion.

undertake monitoring, sample 114(a)(1) regarding certain title II requirements

Solid Fossil Fuel (e.g., Coal)

Gaseous Fossil Fuel (e.g., Natural Gas)

> 250 mmBtu/hr ....................................... None .......................................................................................................................... 3

Fossil Liquid Fuel (e.g., Diesel)

> 250 mmBtu/hr ....................................... None .......................................................................................................................... 3

Biomass or Biomass-Derived Fuels (e.g., wood)

stationary combustion equipment are

1,000 410 350,000 250 61 32,000 9.1

TABLE E–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR ADIPIC ACID PRODUCTION

1,000 .................................................................... 9,300,000 4 9,300,000 100 4 100

1,000 ...................................................... 6,402,000 14 6,402,000 100 14 100

Production Capacity Threshold metric tons Al/year

64 ........................................................... 6,402,000 14 6,402,000 100 14 100

TABLE G–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR AMMONIA MANUFACTURING

1,000 .................................................................................... 14,543,007 24 14,543,007 100 24 100

TABLE H–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR CEMENT MANUFACTURING

1,000 ............................................................................ 86.83 107 86.83 100 107 100

TABLE I–1. FLUORINATED GHGS USED BY THE ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY

which etches away residual material OAR–2008–0508–009); 2006 IPCC Guidelines.

TABLE I–2. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY

1,000 ...................................................... 5,984,462 216 5,972,909 99.8 173 80

Semi-conductors ... 1,080 silicon m2 .... 175 5,741,676 5,492,066 96 91 52

TABLE J–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR ETHANOL PRODUCTION

TABLE K–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR FERROALLOY PRODUCTION FACILITIES

1,000 ............................................................ 2,343,990 9 2,343,990 100 9 100

and facilities that would be covered

1,000 ........................................................ 5,300,000 12 5,300,000 100 12 100

Production Capacity-Based Thresholds

50,000 ...................................................... 5,300,000 12 5,300,000 100 12 100

TABLE M–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR FOOD PROCESSING FACILITIES

1,000 mtCO2e .......................................... NE 5,719 NE NE 802 14.0

TABLE N–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR GLASS MANUFACTURING

1,000 ........................................................ 4,425,269 374 4,336,892 98 217 58

TABLE O–1. CAPACITY-BASED THRESHOLDS

2 ............................................................... 13,848,483 3 13,848,483 100 3 100

TABLE P–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR HYDROGEN PRODUCTION

No threshold ......................................................................... 0 15,226,620 100.0 77 100

TABLE Q–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR IRON AND STEEL PRODUCTION

all in .......................................................... 85,150,877 130 85,150,877 100 130 100

TABLE Q–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR IRON AND STEEL PRODUCTION—Continued

100,000 .................................................... 85,150,877 130 84,468,696 99.2 111 85

TABLE R–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR LEAD SMELTERS

1,000 ........................................................ 866,000 27 859,000 99 17 63

TABLE S–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR LIME MANUFACTURING

1,000 ........................................................ 25,421,043 89 25,421,043 100 89 100

TABLE T–1. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS FOR MG PRODUCTION BASED ON EMISSIONS

1,000 ........................................................ 3,200,000 13 2,954,559 92 13 100