[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 247 (Monday, December 27, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 81365-81369]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-32453]
[[Page 81365]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part IV
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Part 98
Call for Information: Information on Inputs to Emission Equations Under
the Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases Rule; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 75 , No. 247 / Monday, December 27, 2010 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 81366]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 98
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0964; FRL-9242-8]
Call for Information: Information on Inputs to Emission Equations
Under the Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases Rule
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Call for Information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is publishing this call for information and public comment
to solicit certain additional information pertaining to reporting of
inputs to emission equations under the Mandatory Greenhouse Gas
Reporting Rule. In response to EPA's July 7, 2010 proposed
confidentiality determinations for data required under the reporting
rule, EPA received several comments that warrant in-depth evaluation of
potential harm to businesses from possible public availability of some
of this data. The information and comment solicited by this notice will
assist EPA as we consider a long-term approach that will balance data
quality and transparency with the reporting businesses' need to protect
sensitive business information.
DATES: Information and comments must be received on or before February
25, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit your information and comments, identified by Docket
ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0964 by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: [email protected]. Include Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0964 (and/or RIN number) in the subject line of the
message.
Fax: (202) 566-1741.
Mail: Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center
(EPA/DC), Mailcode 2822T, Attention Docket ID No. OAR-2010-0964, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20004.
Hand/Courier Delivery: EPA Docket Center, Public Reading
Room, EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20004. Such deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be
made for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your information and comments to Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0964. EPA's policy is that all information and comments
received will be included in the public docket without change and may
be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Send or deliver
information identified as CBI to only the mail or hand/courier delivery
address listed above, attention: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0964.
The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access''
system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Docket, EPA/
DC, EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC. This Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone
number for the Air Docket is (202) 566-1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carole Cook, Climate Change Division,
Office of Atmospheric Programs (MC-6207J), Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone
number: (202) 343-9263; fax number: (202) 343-2342; e-mail address:
[email protected].
Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket,
an electronic pre-publication copy of this call for information will
also be available through the WWW. Following the Administrator's
signature, a copy of this action will be posted on EPA's greenhouse gas
reporting rule Web site at http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/ghgrulemaking.html.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Acronyms and Abbreviations. The following acronyms and
abbreviations are used in this document.
CAA Clean Air Act
CBI confidential business information
CEMS continuous emission monitoring system(s)
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FR Federal Register
GHG greenhouse gas
NGO nongovernmental organization
U.S. United States
Organization of this Document. The following outline is provided to
aid in locating information in this preamble.
I. Background
II. What is this action?
III. What specific information is EPA seeking?
A. Specific information identifying how public availability of
any inputs to emission equations data elements would cause harm to
any reporter
IV. What should I consider as I prepare my information and comments
to EPA?
A. Submitting CBI
B. Tips for Preparing Your Information and Comments
I. Background
On October 30, 2009, EPA published the Mandatory Greenhouse Gas
(GHG) Reporting Rule for collecting information regarding GHGs from a
broad range of industry sectors (74 FR 56260). Under 40 CFR part 98 of
the GHG Reporting Rule (hereinafter referred to as ``Part 98'') and its
subsequent amendments, EPA will collect data from certain facilities
and suppliers above specified thresholds. The data to be reported
consists of GHG emissions information as well as other data, including
information necessary to characterize, quantify, and verify the
reported emissions. In the preamble to Part 98, we stated, ``Through a
notice and comment process, we will establish those data elements that
are `emissions data' and therefore [under CAA section
[[Page 81367]]
114(c)] will not be afforded the protections of CBI. As part of that
exercise, in response to requests provided in comments, we may identify
classes of information that are not emissions data, and are CBI'' (74
FR 56287, October 30, 2009).
On July 7, 2010, EPA proposed confidentiality determinations for
Part 98 data elements and proposed amending EPA's regulation for
handling confidential business information to add specific procedures
for the treatment of Part 98 data (75 FR 39094; hereinafter referred to
as the ``July 7, 2010 CBI proposal''). The July 7, 2010 CBI proposal
proposed confidentiality statuses for the data elements for subparts
included in the 2009 final Part 98 rule (see 74 FR 56260, October 30,
2009), four subparts finalized in July 2010 (see 75 FR 39736, July 12,
2010), and seven new subparts that had been proposed but not yet
finalized as of July 2010 (see 75 FR 18576, 75 FR 18608, and 75 FR
18652, April 12, 2010). The July 7, 2010 CBI proposal also covered
proposed changes to the reporting requirements for some of the 2009
final Part 98 subparts. These changes were proposed in two separate
rulemakings (see 75 FR 18455, April, 12, 2010; and 75 FR 33950, June
15, 2010).
On August 11, 2010, EPA published a proposed amendment to Part 98
to change the description of some reported data elements and require
reporting of some new data elements (75 FR 48744; hereinafter referred
to as the ``August 11, 2010 revisions proposal''). EPA concurrently
issued a supplemental CBI proposal that proposed confidentiality
determinations for the new and revised data elements included in the
August 11, 2010 revisions notice (75 FR 43889, July 27, 2010;
hereinafter referred to as the ``July 27, 2010 supplemental CBI
proposal.)''
As described in detail in the CBI proposals identified above, EPA
grouped Part 98 data into 22 data categories (11 direct emitter data
categories and 11 supplier data categories), with each of the
categories containing data elements that are similar in type or
characteristics. EPA then proposed confidentiality determinations for
each category, with a few exceptions that are not relevant to today's
action. Consistent with EPA's long-standing interpretation, EPA
proposed that data elements in the inputs to emission equations data
category meet the definition of emission data under 40 CFR
2.301(a)(2)(i) and therefore, under CAA section 114(c), could not be
held as confidential once they were reported to EPA.
EPA received numerous public comments on the July 7, 2010 CBI
proposal and the July 27, 2010 supplemental CBI proposal. Though we are
still in the process of considering these comments, we plan to complete
our consideration of these comments and issue final confidentiality
determinations for the Part 98 data elements that are not inputs to
emission equations, which constitute approximately 75 percent of the
data elements, in a separate final action.
However, EPA received comments that raise concerns regarding the
public availability of data in the inputs to emission equations
category. Almost all commenters from industry wrote that some or all
inputs to emission equations (which include product compositions, raw
materials used, fuel types and quantities, production volumes, and
other process-specific information) are considered trade secrets or
otherwise sensitive business information, and that making that
information publicly available would cause them serious competitive
harm. Some commenters expressed concern that public disclosure of
production volumes and process-specific information could give
competitors insight into sensitive operational limits and process
capabilities. The commenters explained that, combined with other
publicly available information, this information could give competitors
details concerning business positions or vulnerabilities that could be
used to a reporter's disadvantage. Some commenters stated that
disclosure of the type, composition, and relative proportions of raw
materials used would reveal the specific formula used to manufacture
their products. Others expressed concern that product composition data
reveal information about their products' performance characteristics.
Some stated that public availability of information about the types and
quantities of fuels consumed would reveal sensitive details about
individual production processes' energy usage and could be used to
estimate relative production costs.
Several Part 98 reporters commented that, had they known that EPA
would later propose that inputs to emission equations qualify as
emission data that must be made available to the public under CAA
section 114(c), they would have commented more critically and more
extensively on Part 98 equations when they were proposed in 2009 and
might have suggested or agreed to alternatives such as third-party
audits or installation of continuous emission monitoring systems
(CEMS). Several reporters wrote that they would have installed CEMS or
otherwise changed their compliance approaches. Commenters further noted
that, for some subparts, Part 98 allows monitoring emissions with CEMS
as an alternative to calculation with emission equations but that, by
the time EPA proposed CBI determinations in July 2010, reporters no
longer could install CEMS for 2010. As a result, commenters stated,
these reporters were locked into using the emission equations for 2010
reporting if that was the methodology they chose. They argued that
public availability of potentially sensitive inputs for calculation of
2010 emissions should not be based on a reporter's decision not to
install CEMS for 2010 when this decision was made prior to and without
knowledge of the July 7, 2010 CBI proposal.
EPA has reviewed these comments and has concluded that some of the
concerns warrant more extensive evaluation of potential harm from the
public availability of inputs to equations. To assist EPA in this
evaluation, EPA is issuing this notice to call for certain additional
information that the Agency has determined is necessary or helpful in
order to evaluate and take action on the concerns described above.
To allow EPA time to complete our evaluation and take appropriate
actions before collecting inputs to equations, EPA is proposing in a
separate notice to defer to March 31, 2014 the deadline for reporting
inputs to equations. EPA is also concurrently promulgating an interim
final rule that defers the reporting deadline for inputs to equations
to August 31, 2011. This short-term deferral allows EPA time to
complete the notice and comment rulemaking for the longer deferral
while avoiding possible public availability of inputs to equations
before EPA can evaluate and take appropriate actions regarding inputs
to equations.
II. What is this action?
EPA is soliciting information and viewpoints from interested
parties on how, specifically, public availability of inputs to emission
equations in Part 98 could cause competitive harm. We are also
interested in information on additional approaches to calculating GHG
emissions that do not use data elements that may be considered
sensitive and on additional approaches to verifying reported GHG
emission data if any inputs to emission equations are not reported to
EPA. In addition, we are soliciting information on whether any of the
inputs to emission equations data elements are already published or
publicly available elsewhere,
[[Page 81368]]
discernable from publicly available information or otherwise not
sensitive. The specific information requested is listed in Section III
of this call for information.
This call for information is a critical part of EPA's consideration
of treatment of inputs. If reporters have serious concerns about inputs
to equations information becoming publicly available, it is crucial
that they respond in a detailed fashion to this call for information.
The specific information received will help EPA to develop a sound,
long-term approach that balances data quality and transparency with the
need to protect sensitive business information. When EPA receives the
additional requested information, we will be able to fully evaluate
which inputs to equations, if any, could result in serious business
harms if made available to the public. For such cases, if any, EPA
would evaluate whether emissions can be calculated or verified using
additional methodologies, consistent with the transparency and accuracy
goals of Part 98. Should EPA identify any such additional
methodologies, EPA may propose to amend Part 98 to allow these
additional emission measurement or calculation approaches. If
additional approaches to calculate or verify emissions are viable, EPA
may decide that it is not necessary to collect certain highly sensitive
inputs and propose to amend Part 98 accordingly.
As stated in the July 7, 2010 CBI proposal preamble, EPA is
committed to transparency in the GHG Reporting Program. We consider
transparency important because it promotes public confidence in the
data and enables the public, industry, NGOs, and other stakeholders to
better understand the sources of GHG emissions and the factors that
affect the quantities of GHGs emitted. Any approach we adopt will be
based on a well-balanced consideration of both the importance of
protecting certain highly sensitive data elements and our commitment to
the GHG Reporting Program's transparency and accuracy. Should EPA
decide that it is necessary to amend Part 98 as a result of this
evaluation, we would promulgate any such amendment through a notice and
comment process.
III. What specific information is EPA seeking?
Although a few commenters on the July 7, 2010 CBI proposal
identified specific data elements and provided supporting rationale
regarding how the public availability of individual data elements would
cause harm to their competitive positions, many provided only general
statements that inputs to emission equations can be sensitive and
should be held confidential. Other commenters noted that inputs to
emission equations that reporters allege to be sensitive may already be
publicly available, but did not identify specific data elements and
where they are published. To enable us to better understand and
evaluate stakeholder concerns and assertions, EPA requests from
interested parties information and views on the following topics and
questions:
Specific information identifying how public
availability of any inputs to emission equations data elements would
cause harm to any reporter.
--The identity of specific data elements used as inputs to emission
equations that you consider sensitive business information that
would cause competitive harm if disclosed. To better assist us in
identifying the data element, include the rule citation for each
data element you identify.
--For each data element identified in the above bullet, you should
provide a specific explanation of how disclosure of the data would
cause competitive harm. Describe the measures currently taken to
keep the data confidential. If your concern is that competitors
could use a particular input to discern sensitive information,
specifically describe the pathway by which this could occur and
explain how the discerned information would negatively affect your
competitive position. Discuss how this data element may differ from
similar data that is already publicly available. Describe any unique
process or aspect of your facility that would be revealed if the
particular data element you consider sensitive were made publicly
available. If the data element you identify would cause harm only
when used in combination with other publicly available data, then
describe the other data, identify the public source(s) of this data,
and explain how the combination of data could be used to cause
competitive harm. Please be as specific as possible in your
responses and include all information necessary to evaluate your
assertions.
Which, if any, data that are inputs to emission
equations are already publicly available, discernable from other
publicly available data, or otherwise not sensitive for any
reporter.
--In your response, please identify the manner and location in which
each specific data element you identify is available or not
sensitive, including a citation. If the data are physically
published, such as in a book, industry trade publication, or Federal
agency publication, provide the title, volume number (if
applicable), author(s), publisher, publication date, and ISBN or
other identifier. For data published on a Web site, provide the
address of the Web site and identify the Web site publisher and
content author.
Additional calculation or measurement approaches for a
particular subpart that would comparably measure or calculate GHG
emissions but would not use data elements that you consider to be
sensitive as inputs to emission equations.
--Please provide full equations and describe your suggested
calculation and/or measurement approach in detail. Describe the
parameters used as inputs and explain how each input parameter could
be measured. Indicate whether the measurement devices needed already
exist or whether new measuring equipment would have to be installed
and the time required for such installation. Compare the accuracy
and cost of your proposed approach with those of the existing Part
98 approaches and describe any unique or unusual facility-specific
situations in which your recommended approach would not provide
accurate estimates of GHG emissions.
Verification approaches that could be used to verify
emission figures and that would not require reporting to EPA the
specific data elements you consider sensitive.
--Under the existing Part 98 rule, EPA will use the inputs to
emissions equations to verify reported GHG emissions. EPA solicits
suggestions for additional approaches for verifying the GHG
emissions for facilities that use the existing Part 98 emission
equations. In addition, we seek suggestions for verifying, without
reporting to EPA, sensitive inputs to emissions equations. Identify
any additional parameters that could be used for verification and
the particular subpart that would be affected and explain how they
would be used. Describe any particular situations in which your
suggested approach should or should not be used.
EPA strongly urges any parties concerned about the public
availability of inputs to equations to submit in detail the information
requested above. If EPA is to seriously consider potentially revising
the requirements of Part 98, the agency must have robust data on which
to base those revisions. Conclusory or unsubstantiated statements will
not suffice.
Please note that we are not requesting additional comment on EPA's
proposed determination in the CBI proposals described above that inputs
to emission equations constitute emission data. EPA received comment on
that proposed determination during the public comment period for the
CBI proposals and will respond to those comments in a future action.
IV. What should I consider as I prepare my information and comments to
EPA?
A. Submitting CBI
Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to
be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD ROM that you mail to EPA,
mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI
[[Page 81369]]
and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific
information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version
of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the
comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be
submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information marked as CBI
will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in
40 CFR part 2.
If you have any questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming
CBI, please consult the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.
B. Tips for Preparing Your Information and Comments
When submitting information and comments, remember to:
Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (e.g., subject heading, Federal Register date and page
number).
Follow directions. EPA may ask you to respond to specific questions
or organize comments by referencing a CFR part or section number.
Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/
or data that you used.
If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived
at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced.
Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and suggest
alternatives.
Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
Make sure to submit your information and comments by the comment
period deadline identified in the preceding section titled DATES. To
ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket ID number
assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page of your
response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal Register
citation.
To expedite review of your comments by Agency staff, you are
encouraged to send a separate copy of your comments, in addition to the
copy you submit to the official docket, to Carole Cook, U.S. EPA,
Office of Atmospheric Programs, Climate Change Division, Mail Code
6207-J, Washington, DC 20460, telephone (202) 343-9263, e-mail address:
[email protected].
Dated: December 17, 2010.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2010-32453 Filed 12-23-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P