![[logo] US EPA](https://webarchive.library.unt.edu/eot2008/20090509223414im_/http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Frequently Asked Questions: Proposed Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule
- What is the action being taken?
- Who would have to report under the proposal?
- What is the purpose of the rule?
- Which greenhouse gases are covered under the proposal?
- What is the estimated cost to implement this rule?
- What impact would this proposal have on small businesses?
- Would individual home owners be required to report under this proposal?
- Would individual car or truck owners be required to report?
- Would owners of commercial and residential buildings be required to report?
- Would emissions from agricultural sources be covered in the rule?
- Would dairy or beef producers be required report the annual emissions of methane emitted via enteric fermentation (i.e. methane emissions from the natural digestive processes from cattle)?
- Would livestock operations be required to report emissions from manure management systems?
- Would non-livestock farmers have to report under this rule?
- Will federal facilities have to report emissions?
- How did EPA develop the threshold of 25,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year?
- Why did EPA propose a 25,000 mtCO2e threshold as opposed to a 10,000 mtCO2e threshold?
- How much is 25,000 metric tons of CO2 equivalent?
- Are there some sectors where all entities would have to report regardless of whether they meet the 25,000 mtCO2e annual threshold?
- Is there a simple way for facilities with stationary fuel combustion units to determine if they would be required to report?
- Are GHG sinks and offsets included in this proposal?
- Why are both downstream and upstream reporting required?
- Will there be double-reporting of emissions under this proposal?
- Are mobile sources included in this proposal?
- Would all entities that emit GHGs directly be included in the rule?
- How is this reporting rule different from the Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks report (Inventory)?
- Will this proposed rule negate the need for the Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks in the future?
- How would data be efficiently shared among existing state GHG programs and this new federal reporting program?
- Did EPA engage stakeholders in the development of the rule?
- What is the timetable for finalizing this rule?
- How often would entities be required to report?
- When would the reporting begin?
- How would confidential business information be handled?
- Would EPA collect data at the unit-, facility-, or corporate-wide level?
- Where can I find more detailed information on the proposed rule?
- How can I submit written comments on the proposed rule?
- Will there be public hearings?
What is the action being taken?
EPA is proposing a rule to require mandatory reporting of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the United States. EPA is developing this rule in accordance with the FY2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act, which was signed into law in December 2007.
Who would have to report under the proposal?
In general, the proposed rule calls for suppliers of fossil fuels or industrial greenhouse gases, manufacturers of vehicles and engines, and facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons of CO2 equivalent (mtCO2e) or more of GHG emissions per year to submit annual reports to EPA. The proposed rule does not require control of GHGs, but rather requires only that sources listed above monitor and report GHG emissions.
What is the purpose of the rule?
The purpose of the rule is to collect comprehensive and accurate data on GHG emissions that can be used to inform future policy decisions.
Which greenhouse gases are covered under the proposal?
The proposed rule would require reporting of anthropogenic GHG emissions covered under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC); carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFC), perfluorocarbons (PFC), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), as well as other fluorinated gases (e.g., nitrogen trifluoride and hydrofluorinated ethers). These gases are often expressed in metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (mtCO2e).
What is the estimated cost to implement this rule?
EPA estimates that the expected cost to comply with the reporting requirements to the private sector is $160 million for the first year. In subsequent years the annualized costs for the private sector would be $127 million.
What impact would this proposal have on small businesses?
As a part of the Regulatory Impact Analysis for this proposal, EPA has calculated that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. While EPA estimates that some small businesses in some sectors would be required to report, the cost of reporting would be less than 1% of the average annual sales, even for the sectors with the largest economic impacts. For more information on this topic please view the proposed rule itself and view the Small Business Information Sheet on the Information Sheet page.
Would individual home owners be required to report under this proposal?
No. The average annual household emissions in the U.S. are about 11.3 mtCO2e, well below the threshold for reporting of 25,000 mtCO2e per year.
Would individual car or truck owners be required to report?
No. Under the proposal, emissions from mobile sources would be covered by reports from fuel suppliers and manufacturers of vehicles and engines, not by vehicle owners. However, EPA is taking comment on whether it is appropriate to require additional information from fleet operators.
Would owners of commercial and residential buildings be required to report?
The vast majority of commercial and residential building owners would likely not be required to report. For commercial operations, over 75% of buildings have combustion equipment less that 1 mmBtu/hr (mmBTU = thousand thousand BTUs). When it comes to commercial buildings having boilers for heating water and steam, approximately 80% of the buildings have boilers less than 10 mmBtu/hr. Furthermore, any facility that has an aggregate maximum rated heat input capacity of the stationary fuel combustion units less than 30 mmBtu/hr is not included in this proposal. If a building does have an aggregate maximum rated heat input capacity equal to or greater than 30 mmBtu/hr, then that facility may need to do further calculations to determine if they meet the threshold for reporting. For more information on this topic please view Subpart C of the proposed rule and view the Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources Information Sheet on the Information Sheet page.
Would emissions from agricultural sources be covered in the rule?
EPA is proposing to require reporting from manure management systems that have emissions equal to or greater than 25,000 mtCO2e per year. However, no other GHG emission source associated with agriculture is proposed to be covered. Thus, enteric fermentation (emissions of methane from the digestive system of cattle and other ruminant livestock), rice cultivation, field burning of agricultural residues, composting, and agricultural soils would not be covered under this reporting requirement. The challenges to including these sources in the rule are that available methods to estimate facility-level emissions for these sources yield uncertain results, and that these sources are characterized by a large number of small emitters. In light of these challenges, EPA is not including these sources in the proposal because it is impractical to require entity-level reporting of emissions from these sources. For more information on the proposed reporting requirements for manure management systems please view Subpart JJ of the proposed rule and view the Manure Management Information Sheet on the Information Sheet page.
Would dairy or beef producers be required report the annual emissions of methane emitted via enteric fermentation (i.e. methane emissions from the natural digestive processes from cattle)?
No. The proposed rule would not require reporting of reporting emissions of methane from ruminant animals via enteric fermentation.
Would livestock operations be required to report emissions from manure management systems?
If emissions from the manure management systems are less than 25,000 mtCO2e per year either due to the system size or as a result of a methane capture system, then that facility would not be required to report. EPA’s modeling of this emission source indicates that 40-50 of the very largest livestock operations would be required to report at the 25,000 mtCO2e per year threshold level. Many large operations generate methane but capture it for use rather than emitting it to the atmosphere. For more information on the proposed reporting requirements for manure management systems please view Subpart JJ of the proposed rule and view the Manure Management Systems Information Sheet on the Information Sheet page.
Would non-livestock farmers have to report under this rule?
No, unless they have a very large stationary combustion source running on fossil fuel. Emissions sources associated with agriculture, other than from manure management systems, are not covered by this rule. Agricultural emissions sources that are not covered under the rule include rice cultivation, field burning of agricultural residues, composting, agricultural soils, and carbon storage in living biomass or harvested wood products. As such we expect that most non-livestock farmers would not be required to report. Please note that just like any other facility a very large farm with a covered source category such as stationary combustion sources with emissions over the 25,000 mtCO2e per year would still be required to report those emissions resulting from stationary combustion. For more information on stationary source combustion please view Subpart C of the proposed rule and view the Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources Information Sheet on the Information Sheet page.
Will federal facilities have to report emissions?
The majority of building owners or operators would very likely not be required to report, including federal facilities. Most federal facilities would likely only have to consider whether their emissions from stationary combustion are over 25,000 mtCO2e, because they would not have other onsite operations that may trigger the rule (e.g., a power plant or landfills). Over 75% of buildings have stationary combustion equipment with an aggregate maximum rated heat input capacity of less that 1 mmBtu/hr. When it comes to most buildings with boilers for heating water and steam, approximately 80% of buildings have boilers with an aggregate maximum rated heat input capacity of less than 10 mmBtu/hr. These are well below the threshold for aggregate maximum rated heat input capacity of the stationary fuel combustion units of less than 30 mmBtu/hr. If a building does have an aggregate maximum rated heat input capacity 30 mmBtu/hr or greater, then that facility may need to do further calculations to determine if they meet the threshold for reporting (see stationary fuel combustion sheet for more information).
If a federal facility has other source categories that are included in the proposal, such as a power plant or a landfill (see information sheet on General Provisions) they may also be required to report under the proposal. Generally, EPA estimates that there will be limited impact on federal facilities.
Federal facilities would not have to report emissions from fleets (e.g., passenger vehicles, aircraft, and marine vessels) under the proposal.
EPA is proposing to collect data on mobile source emissions through upstream fuel suppliers and manufacturers of vehicles and engines (see mobile sources information sheet and petroleum product suppliers information sheet).
How did EPA develop the threshold of 25,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year?
EPA considered several factors when developing the reporting threshold, including the form of the threshold (e.g., emissions/year, potential to emit, capacity-based, facility or unit level). EPA reviewed existing capacity-based (e.g., 25 megawatts) and emissions-based thresholds used in other emissions programs (e.g., California’s 25,000 mtCO2e) and the 10,000 mtCO2e levels used in some voluntary programs, such as the Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) 1605b program. EPA sought to maximize coverage of U.S. emissions while excluding smaller emitters.
Why did EPA propose a 25,000 mtCO2e threshold as opposed to a 10,000 mtCO2e threshold?
EPA's goal in selecting a threshold was to maximize GHG emissions coverage while minimizing the number of reporters and impacts on small businesses. EPA considered thresholds of 1,000, 10,000, 25,000, and 100,000 mtCO2e/year when developing the proposal. For each threshold, EPA assessed the number of facilities that would be covered as well as the total amount of emissions that would be covered. These analyses suggested that at a threshold of 25,000 metric tons of mtCO2e/year, 13,000 facilities and 85-90% of total GHG emissions would be covered. At a threshold of 10,000 mtCO2e/year approximately 20,000 facilities and 86-91% of GHG emissions would be covered. Given the negligible increase in GHG emissions coverage associated with a 50% increase in the number of entities that would have to report, EPA determined that the threshold of 25,000 metric tons of mtCO2e is most appropriate. Further, at the 10,000 mtCO2e/year level, EPA found that there would be a higher economic impact on small businesses including small industrial facilities, and commercial buildings.
How much is 25,000 metric tons of CO2 equivalent?
25,000 mtCO2e are equivalent to emissions from annual energy use of about 2,200 homes. It is also equivalent to just over 58,000 barrels of oil consumed or 131 railcars’ worth of coal. For more information about GHG emissions equivalencies in general you may access EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator.
Are there some sectors where all entities would have to report regardless of whether they meet the 25,000 mtCO2e annual threshold?
Yes. For 19 of the source categories, all of the facilities that have that particular source category within their boundaries would be subject to the proposed rule. For these facilities, EPA’s analysis indicated that nearly all facilities with that source category emit more than 25,000 mtCO2e per year or that only a few facilities emit marginally below this level. These source categories include large manufacturing operations such as petroleum refineries and cement production. Taking the proposed approach simplifies the applicability determination for facilities with these source categories. For more information on which source categories are would be covered by this proposal, please review the proposed rule and view the General Provisions Information Sheet on the Information Sheet page.
Is there a simple way for facilities with stationary fuel combustion units to determine if they would be required to report?
Yes. In order to reduce burden on small emitters, EPA is not including in the proposal any facility that has an aggregate maximum rated heat input capacity of the stationary fuel combustion units of less than 30 mmBtu/hr and no other emission sources within their boundary. Stationary combustion units include among others boilers, combustion turbines, engines, incinerators, and process heaters. According to our analysis, a facility with stationary combustion units that has a maximum rated heat input capacity of less than 30 mmBtu/hr would not exceed the threshold of 25,000 mtCO2e per year. However, EPA is seeking further comment on this strategy in the proposal. For more information on this topic please view Subpart C of the proposed rule and view the Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources Information Sheet on the Information Sheet page.
Are GHG sinks and offsets included in this proposal?
No. This proposed rule focuses solely on reporting of emissions, or fuel or chemicals that cause emissions. It is not meant to be a registry tracking individual projects or reductions; nor is it intended to replace the Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks.
Why are both downstream and upstream reporting required?
The legislative history of the Appropriations Act instructed EPA to include reporting of emissions resulting from upstream production and downstream sources, as appropriate. Requiring reporting by upstream and downstream sources maximizes the coverage of emissions reported while avoiding the need to have many small emitters report. In many cases, emissions from fossil fuel and industrial gases are emitted by a large number of small sources, including the commercial and residential sectors such as HFCs emitted from home air conditioning units, and CO2 emissions from small stationary combustion sources such as household furnaces. Rather than gathering data on these emissions by requiring reporting by hundreds or thousands of small facilities or individual vehicle owners, the proposed rule excludes small emitters. However, the proposed rule accounts for these emissions through reporting by the suppliers of industrial gases and fossil fuels, and manufacturers of new vehicles and engines.
Downstream reporting means that GHG emissions are reported at the point of emission. An example of downstream reporting would be a power plant reporting GHG emissions from burning fuel to produce electricity. Upstream reporting is based on the amount of emissions or the emissions rate expected from products that reporters supply. In this proposal, upstream reporters include suppliers of petroleum products, natural gas, or coal; suppliers of industrial GHGs such as refrigerants; and manufacturers of vehicle and engines.
Will there be double-reporting of emissions under this proposal?
Yes. There is inherent double-reporting of emissions in a program that includes both upstream and downstream sources. This double-reporting is nevertheless consistent with the appropriations language, and provides valuable information to EPA and stakeholders for developing climate change policy and programs. For example, policies such as a cap on emissions associated with petroleum combustion would likely apply to upstream suppliers of fuel, whereas end-use emission standards would apply to direct emitters downstream. Data from both upstream and downstream sources assist with formulating and assessing the impacts of potential policies.
Are mobile sources included in this proposal?
Yes, EPA is proposing to collect GHG emissions rate information from the manufacturers of new vehicles and engines including passenger vehicles, heavy trucks, locomotive engines, marine engines, aircraft engines, and other non-road engines and equipment. We are proposing to incorporate these requirements into the long-standing testing and reporting requirements under Title II of the CAA (Clean Air Act), and to build from existing testing methods. Mobile source emissions will also be accounted for through upstream reporting by suppliers of petroleum products and coal-based liquids. EPA, in addition, is requesting comment on the need for collecting additional data from mobile source fleet operators. We are not, however, proposing to have facilities report emissions from mobile sources at their operations such as fleets of passenger vehicles and off-road equipment.
Would all entities that emit GHGs directly be included in the rule?
No. Direct emissions from entities that do not contain a source category where all entities are required to report and that fall below the threshold of 25,000 mtCO2e per year would not be required to report. In addition, there are certain emissions sources that have not been included due to difficulty in measurement and gathering data. Excluded sectors include many of the biological sources of GHG emissions such as methane emissions from rice production and enteric fermentation from cattle and other ruminant animals. In developing the rule, EPA’s objective was to maximize coverage of U.S. emissions while minimizing administrative burden to reporters and the government. This rule is estimated to cover about 85-90% of total national U.S. emissions.
How is this reporting rule different from the Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks report (Inventory)?
The Inventory is a comprehensive top-down national assessment of national GHG emissions, and uses national energy data and other national statistics. The use of the aggregated national data means that the national emissions estimates are not broken down at the geographic or facility level. In contrast, this reporting rule focuses on bottom-up data and individual sources above appropriate thresholds. While the rule would provide more specific data, it would not provide full coverage of total annual U.S. GHG emissions, as is required in the development of the Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks in reporting to the UNFCCC. The Inventory is developed by EPA annually, in consultation with other U.S. agencies, as a required under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
Will this proposed rule negate the need for the Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks in the future?
No. The data collected under this proposed rule would not replace the system in place to produce the comprehensive annual national GHG inventory. However, it may serve as a useful tool to better improve the accuracy of future national-level inventories.
How would data be efficiently shared among existing state GHG programs and this new federal reporting program?
EPA is proposing that reporting entities would report directly to EPA. In order to reduce the burden of reporting, EPA staff is working with The Climate Registry and the Exchange Network on a data exchange standard for GHG reporting. EPA anticipates that this coordination will reduce the burden of reporting for both reporters and governments.
Did EPA engage stakeholders in the development of the rule?
Yes. EPA staff held more than 100 meetings with over 250 stakeholders including trade associations, industries, state and regional governments, environmental groups, and tribal associations during the development of the rule.
What is the timetable for finalizing this rule?
On April 10, 2009. the proposed rule was published in the Federal Register (www.regulations.gov) under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0508. The public comment period is open until June 9, 2009, 60 days following publication in the Federal Register.
- Preamble and proposed rule (PDF) (285 pp, 1,565KB, About PDF)
- Supporting Documents in the Docket
Two public hearings were held during the comment period on April 6-7 and April 16, 2009.
How often would entities be required to report?
In general, EPA proposes to require annual reporting. The first reports would be submitted to EPA in 2011 and would provide data for the year 2010 emissions. Some facilities and suppliers that currently report similar data more frequently to other mandatory programs, such as the Acid Rain Program and fuels program, would continue the current practice as well as submit annual GHG emission reports under this rule.
When would the reporting begin?
EPA is proposing that reporters would be required to submit their first GHG emissions report to EPA in early 2011. This report would provide data on emissions from the year 2010. EPA is proposing that reporting requirements for vehicle and engine manufacturers apply beginning with the 2011 model year.
How would confidential business information be handled?
EPA will protect any information claimed as confidential business information (CBI) in accordance with regulations in 40 CFR Chapter 1, Part 2, Subpart B. However, in general, emissions data collected under CAA sections 114 and 208 cannot be considered CBI.
Would EPA collect data at the unit-, facility-, or corporate-wide level?
For the majority of reporters, EPA would collect data at the facility level. There are a few exceptions where there would be reporting at the corporate level. The exceptions are vehicle and engine manufacturers, fossil fuel importers and exporters, and local gas distribution companies.
Facility means any physical property, plant, building, structure, source, or stationary equipment located on one or more contiguous or adjacent properties in actual physical contact or separated solely by a public roadway or other public right-of-way and under common ownership or common control, that emits or may emit any greenhouse gas. Operators of military installations may classify such installations as more than a single facility based on distinct and independent functional groupings within contiguous military properties.
Where can I find more detailed information on the proposed rule?
Federal Register copies of the proposal and supporting documents may be found at www.regulations.gov or on the Proposed Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule web site, at www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/ghgrulemaking.html. The Federal Register docket number for this proposed rule is Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0508.
An overview powerpoint presentation for the proposal, and information sheets that explain the proposed rule for a broad range of sectors, and other relevant information are available under the “Resources” section of our website for this rulemaking.
EPA is also operating a hotline for general and administrative questions about the proposal which can be accessed via phone at 1-877-GHG-1188 or through the Contact Us page.
How can I submit written comments on the proposed rule?
Instructions on submitting written comments can be found in the preamble and on EPA’s Proposed Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule website at the following url: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/ghgrulemaking.html#written
Will there be public hearings?
Yes. Two public hearings on the Proposed Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule were held:
- April 6-7, 2009, in Arlington, VA; hearing transcripts were posted in the Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0508 on April 23, 2009; and
- April 16, 2009. Sacramento, CA, the transcript will be posted in the Docket shortlly.