EPA Releases Final Mandatory Greenhouse Gases Rule
November 4, 2009
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released the final rule on mandatory reporting of greenhouses gases on October 30. The rule requires reporting by all facilities that release annual emissions of 25,000 megatons CO2 equivalent (25,000mtCO2e). The rule is effective January 1, 2010; the first reports will be due on March 31, 2011, reflecting only Scope 1 emissions from the 2010 calendar year.
Institutions will need to focus on the requirement for emissions from stationary fuel combustion equipment or boilers. Other sources, including cement and aluminum plants, are also required but are not as relevant to institutions. In the case of the stationary fuel combustion equipment or boilers, the rule requires reporting based on a single facility's emissions.
The EPA recommends that even if a facility is emitting less than 25,000mtCO2e at the beginning of a particular year, an institution should begin tracking emissions through the year to ensure the facility has not exceeded the reporting requirement threshold by that December. If you determine that you must report, be aware that the information the EPA requires might differ from what's required by the American College and Universities Presidents' Climate Commitment.
EPA provides the following tools to help you determine if your school needs to report.
Director, Online Learning
- Federal Court Postpones Effective Date of Overtime Rule
- 1098-T Box 1 Reporting Will Not be Required Until 2018 Tax Year
- EPA Issues Hazardous Waste Generator Improvements Rule
- 2017 Intermediate Accounting and Reporting - Winter
January 23-24, 2017
- 2017 Endowment and Debt Management Forum
February 1-3, 2017
- ON-DEMAND: The CBO's Role in Diversity and Inclusion on Campus
- ON-DEMAND: The Clery Act: Strategic Planning to Mitigate Institutional Risk
- ON-DEMAND: Title IX: Key Issues Surrounding Institutional Compliance
- ON-DEMAND: NACUBO Live! Higher Education Accounting Forum
- ON-DEMAND: Responsibility Center Management: Two Different Perspectives